BCC Minutes 01/25/2000 RJanuary25,20000
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
JANUARY 25, 2000
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and
having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in
a REGULAR SESSION in Building F of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
ALSO PRESENT:
CHAIRMAN:
Timothy Constantine
Barbara B. Berry
John C. Norris
Pamela S. Mac'Kie
James D. Carter
Mike McNees, Assistant County Administrator
David Weigel, County Attorney
Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
Tuesday, January 25, 2000
9~00 a.m.
NOTICE~ ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE
ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL,
BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER
WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS
DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS
AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND
WILL BE HEARD UNDER ~PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A
RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED
TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH
RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS
TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES
UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN
ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST
TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE
COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380t ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12~00 NOON TO 1~00 P.M.
1
January 25, 2000
me
INVOCATION - Pastor David Lewis, First Baptist Church of Naples
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
APPROVAL OF AGENDAS
ae
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA.
APPROVAL OF SUMMARY AGENDA.
APPROVAL OF REGULAR AGENDA.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ae
December 8, 1999 - Town Hall Meeting
January 5, 2000 - Special Meeting
PROCLAMATIONS AND SERVICE AWARDS
A. PROCLAMATIONS
1)
Proclamation recognizing the volunteers of the
Veteran's Transportation Program. To be accepted by
Mr. Ronald L. Scott, President, Collier County
Veterans Council
2)
Proclamation proclaiming the month of February, 2000
be designated as Leave a Legacy Month. To be accepted
by Ms. Barbara J. Kent, President, The Community
Foundation of Collier County and Mr. Steve Benson,
Advisors Trust, representing the Planned Giving
Council.
3)
Proclamation dedicating the Collier County Courthouse
in the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
B. SERVICE AWARDS
1)
2)
3)
,~)
5)
6)
Joyce Staiger, Wastewater - 5 Years
Joseph Pierre, Transportation - 5 Years
John Presas, Parks and Recreation - 5 Years
Michael Ossorio, Contractor Licensing - 5 Years
Albert Pesillo, Transportation - 10 Years
Richard Winans, Road and Bridge - 15 Years
2
January 25, 2000
C. PRESENTATIONS
APPROVAL OF CLERK'S REPORT
A. ANALYSIS OF CHANGES TO RESERVES FOR CONTINGENCIES
PUBLIC PETITIONS
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
A. COM~/NITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
Presentation to the Board of County Commissioners of
the 1999 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public
Facilities (AUIR) as provided for in Section 3.15.6 of
the Collier County Land Development Code.
2)
Recommendation to approve Commercial Excavation Permit
No. 59.720, "Panther Island Mitigation Bank" located
in Sections 5, 6, 7, 18 & 19, Township 47 South, Range
27 East; bounded on the north and west by undeveloped
land zoned AG-2 (Lee County), and on the south and
west by vacant land zoned AoMHO (Corkscrew Swamp
Sanctuary).
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1)
CONTINUED FROM 1/11/00: Present the results of staff
and consultant investigations into the extension of
Piper Boulevard easterly to Strand Boulevard (Follow
up to meeting of December 14, 1999).
2)
CONTINUED FROM 1/11/00: Approval of the Median
Landscape Beautification Agreement with 951 Land
Holdings Joint Venture.
3)
CONTINUED FROM 1/11/00: Approve a Resolution
authorizing the County Administrator to execute a
Landscape Construction and Maintenance Memorandum of
Agreement with the Florida Department of
Transportation for State Road 951 Landscape
Improvements.
3
January 25, 2000
4)
CONTINUED FROM 1/11/00: To conduct a Review Hearing
to determine whether sewer impact fees are applicable
to real property located at 1500 East Tamiami Trail.
Approve Petition TM 99-01 for Neighborhood Traffic
Management for Donna Street in the Coconut Creek
Estates neighborhood.
6) This item has been deleted.
7)
Approve funding for Preliminary Engineering and
Environmental Analysis for construction of a roadway
from Radio Road to Davis Boulevard.
C. PUBLIC SERVICES
D. SUPPORT SERVICES
1) Consultant Selection for County Administrator Vacancy.
E. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
F. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
G. EMERGENCY SERVICES
9. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ao
Appointment of member to the Environmental Advisory
Council.
Appointment of member to the Isle of Capri Fire Control
District Advisory Committee.
Appointment of members to the Collier County Code
Enforcement Board.
De
Discussion regarding proposed amendment to the Harris Act
(H.B. 659). (Commissioner Constantine)
11. OTHER ITEMS
4
January 25, 2000
A. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
B. PUBLIC COMMENT ON GENERAL TOPICS
PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HEARD IHMEDIATELY FOLLOWING STAFF ITEMS
12. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS - BCC
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
B. ZONING AMENDMENTS
1)
Petition PUD-92-4 (1), Rich Yovanovich of Goodlette,
Coleman & Johnson, representing Bonita Bay Properties,
Inc., requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate
Health Park PUD having the effect of changing the name
to Golden Gate Commerce Park, eliminating hospital and
some medical center uses, adding retail commercial,
office, hotel, assisted living facilities (ALF) and
residential uses for property located on the northwest
corner of C.R. 951 and access road #2 in Section 34,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida.
2)
Petition PUD-98-17(1), Blair A. Foley, P.E. of Coastal
Engineering Consultants, Inc., representing
Transeastern Properties, Inc., requesting a rezone
from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development known as
Whittenberg Estates PUD for the purpose of revising
the PUD document having the effect of reducing the
side yard setback requirements for single family
detached dwelling units from 7.5 feet to 5 feet,
reducing the minimum distance between principal
structures from 12 feet to 10 feet and allowing lots
fronting on multiple road right-of-ways one front yard
setback, for property located on the north side of
Davis Boulevard (S.R. 84) east of Whitten Drive, in
Section 6, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida, consisting of 38+/- acres.
5
January 25, 2000
C. OTHER
1) THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 5, 2000 LDC
AMENDMENTS PUBLIC HEARING. An Ordinance amending
Ordinance Number 91-102, as amended, the Collier
County Land Development Code, which includes the
comprehensive zoning regulations for the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by
providing for: Section one, Recitals; Section Two,
Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of
Amendments to the Land Development Code, more
specifically amending the following: Article 2, Zoning
Division 2.1. General; Division 2.2. Zoning Districts,
permitted uses, conditional uses, dimensional
standards, Division 2.3. Off-street Parking and
Loading; Division 2.4. Landscaping and Buffering;
Division 2.5. Signs; Division 2.6 Supplemental
District Regulation; Article 3, Division 3.2
Subdivision; Division 3.4 Explosives; Division 3.9
Vegetation Removal Protection and Preservation;
Article 6, Division 6.3. Definitions, including, but
not limited to the definitions of sign monument,
beacon light, roadside sales and riparian line;
Appendix B, typical Road Cross-Sections; Section Four,
Conflict and Severability; Section Five, inclusive in
the Land Development Code; and Section Six, Effective
Date.
13. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
1)
THIS ITEM IS CONTINUED TO THE FEBRUARY 22, 2000
MEETING. Petition A-99-03, C. Perry Peeples of Annis,
Mitchell, Cockey, Edwards and Roehn, P.A.,
representing Keystone Custom Homes, Inc., requesting
an appeal of the Collier County Planning Services
Director's interpretation (I-99-06), that a sales
center intended to market residential development
located on the south side of Piper Boulevard east of
Palm River Boulevard constitutes an off-site sales
facility and is therefore not permitted.
6
January 25, 2000
2)
3)
THIS ITEM IS CONTINUED TO THE FEBRUARY 8, 2000
MEETING. Petition A-99-04, Richard D. Yovanovich of
Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, P.A., representing
Kensington Park Master Association and the Yorktown
Neighborhood Association, requesting an appeal of the
determination of the Collier County Planning
Commission on November 21, 1999, that the changes to
the Carillon PUD Master Plan by adding new commercial
building footprints were insubstantial.
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 11, 2000
4)
MEETING. Petition V-99-21, David E. Bryant,
representing Alfred Luckerbauer, requesting a 7.5-foot
variance to the required 15-foot side setback for
docking facilities to 7.5 feet for property located at
9 Pelican Street East, further described as Lot 40,
Isles of Capri No. 1, in Section 32, Township 51
south, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 11, 2000
MEETING. Petition V-99-25, Joseph Sabatino requesting
a variance of 7.5 feet from the required 7.5 feet to 0
feet along the west side yard of Lots 13 & 14 and
along the east side yard of Lots 36 and 37; a variance
of 1 foot from the required 6 foot maximum to a 7 foot
maximum for height of the courtyard walls; a variance
of 7.5 feet from the required 7.5 feet to 0 feet for
accessory structures along the side lot lines and
within the courtyard walls; and a variance of 10 feet
from the required 10 feet to 0 feet for accessory
structures along the rear lot lines and within the
courtyard walls for properties described as lots 13,
14, 15, 36, 37 and 38, Block 17, Naples Park, Unit 2,
Collier County, Florida.
B. OTHER
STAFF'S COMMUNICATIONS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COMMUNICATIONS
16.
CONSENT AGENDA - Ail matters listed under this item are
considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion
7
January 25, 2000
without separate discussion of each item. If discussion is
desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed
from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
COM/4%INITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
One-time exemption from the vehicle use agreement for
repairs to the County's Transportation Disadvantaged
Bus Fleet.
2)
Approval of lot clearing and filling in the Carson
Lakes Subdivision Phase 1 development.
3)
Request the Board of Commissioners to self-certify
that Collier County meets Florida state requirements
to be designated a "Quick Permitting County".
4)
Petition C-99-11, Duane Wheeler, Carnival Chairman,
Rotary of Immokalee, requesting permit to conduct a
Carnival from February 10,11,12, 13, 2000, on County
owned property located at the Immokalee Regional
Airport.
5)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of
Cardinal Cove at Fiddler's Creek and approve the
performance security.
6)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of
"Terranova of Pelican Marsh Unit One", and approval of
the standard form construction and maintenance
agreement and approval of the amount of the
Performance Security.
7)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of
~Terranova of Pelican Marsh Unit Two", and approval of
the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the
Performance Security.
s)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of
"Terranova of Pelican Marsh Unit three", and approval
of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the
8
January 25, 2000
Performance Security.
9)
Recommendation to approve commercial Excavation Permit
No. 59.693 (MOD.) Redbird Estates Excavation located
in Section 24, township 47 south, Range 27 East:
Bounded on the north, the east and the west by
agricultural zoning and on the south by Redbird Lane
R/W and Agricultural Zoning.
lO)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of
"Ana's Place".
11)
Request to approve for recording the final plat of
~Club Estates Replat"
PUBLIC WORKS
1)
Approve Professional Services Agreement in the amount
of $47,838.00 for roadway and traffic signal
improvements at Vanderbilt Drive (CR 901) and Wiggins
Pass Road (CR 888).
2)
Approve a Resolution to restrict residential driveway
connections on collector and arterial roadways in the
Golden Gate Estates area.
3)
Approve a Resolution to authorize execution of a Local
Agency Agreement with the State of Florida Department
of Transportation.
Approve construction engineering and inspection
services by Hole, Montes and Associates, Inc. for
Livingston Road improvements north of Immokalee Road.
5) This item has been deleted.
6)
Accept a utility easement to complete the North County
Regional Water Treatment Plant 8-MGD expansion.
7)
Approve Professional Services Agreement with
WilsonMiller, Inc., Agnoli, Barber and Brundage, Inc.,
Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., Southern
Mapping, Inc. and Wilkison and Associates, Inc., for
the Fixed Term Land Surveying and Photogrametric
9
January 25, 2000
Ce
Ds
Services (RFP 99-2981).
Approve staff ranking of firms for contract
negotiations for Construction Engineering Inspections
Services for Immokalee Road (I-75 to C.Ro 951) Four
Lane Improvements, RFP #99-2996.
9)
Consideration and approval of an Interlocal Agreement
with Naples Heritage Community Development District.
-mo)
Approval of a Budget Amendment to transfer funds from
Street Lighting Reserves to Capital Outlay.
PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Approve the Older Americans Act Continuation Grant and
authorize the Chairman to sign the contract between
Collier County BCC and the Area Agency on Aging for
Southwest Florida, Inc.
2)
Approve the Master Agreement relating to Services for
Seniors' Grant Programs and authorize the Chairman to
sign the Master Agreement between Collier County BCC
and the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida,
Inc.
3)
Approve the award of Bid No. 99-3024 to Wal-Mart
Stores for the Social Services Prescription Program.
4)
Approval of rental agreement with Telimagine, Inc.,
for telephone system rental agreement for Headquarters
Library, and signature on the contract.
5)
Authorize Collier County Domestic Animal Services to
propose changes and consolidate existing Animal
Control Ordinances.
6)
Approval of a Limited Use License Agreement with Saint
Katherine's Greek Orthodox Church, Inc. for use of
County-owned land for parking.
SUPPORT SERVICES
lO
January 25, 2000
1)
Approval of a Resolution authorizing the Chairman of
the Board of County Commissioners, Collier County,
Florida, to execute deeds and agreements for deed to
right of interment for the purchase of burial lots at
Lake Trafford Memorial Gardens Cemetery, for the 2000
calendar year.
2)
Approval of a Resolution authorizing the execution of
purchase agreements and statutory deeds for the G.A.Co
Land Sales Trust conveyed to Collier County by Avatar
Properties Inc. (Agreement dated November 15, 1983),
by the Chairman of the Board for the 2000 calendar
year.
3)
Approve the attached three (3) Resolutions authorizing
the Board of County Commissioners' Chairman to execute
the appropriate documentation required to expedite the
County's Land Rights Acquisition Program for the
calendar year 2000 Chairman's tenure only.
4)
Approve a Resolution authorizing the Chairman of the
Board of County Commissioners to execute Limited Use
License Agreements for the 2000 calendar year.
s)
Recommendation to declare County-owned property as
surplus and accept the offer received for the sale of
surplus AIS hardware under Bid No. S99-3006.
Award Bid 99-2959 for Temporary Clerical Services.
7)
Approval of Amendments to Lease Agreements Amending
the Method for the Collection of Nominal Rents.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
1)
Approval of Budget Amendment Report - Budget Amendment
#0O-087
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
EMERGENCY SERVICES
1)
Approval of agreement between West Coast Media Group
and Collier County for the development of a Hurricane
11
January 25, 2000
me
Home Protection Guide.
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as
directed
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
17.
1)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
recognize a contractual obligation between fiscal
years and approve carryforward funding.
J. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approve the expert fees associated with the
acquisition of Parcels 713A, 713B, 813A and 813B in
the lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Naples Italian
American Club, Inc., et al., Case No. 98-1672-CA-01
(Airport Road six-Laning Project from Pine Ridge Rd.
to Vanderbilt Beach Rd.)
a)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
approve the mediated Settlement Agreement pertaining
to the easement acquisition of Parcels 105A and 105B
in Collier County v. Marianne Bendott, et al., Case
No. 92-2045-CA, and approve a Stipulated Final
Judgement to be drafted incorporating the same terms
and conditions as the aforementioned Mediated
Settlement Agreement.
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Immokalee Regional Airport Conservation Easement.
SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA~ 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR
APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL
BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR
ORAL OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE
12
January 25, 2000
BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE
ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE
REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM.
ae
Petition DRI-99-02, Karen Bishop of PMS Inc. of Naples,
representing Ronto Livingston, Inc., requesting approval of
the "Ronto Livingston DRI/PUD", a mixed residential
development consisting of a maximum of 1,380 residential
dwelling units, and a golf course and related facilities,
for property located generally east of the future
Livingston Road, west of Interstate 75, and immediately
contiguous and south of the Collier/Lee County boundary in
Section 7, Township 48 South, Range 26 East and Section 12,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 462.72+ acres. (Companion to PUD-99-09).
Petition PUD-99-09, Karen Bishop of PMS, Inc. of Naples,
representing RONTO Livingston, Inc., requesting a rezone
from "A" Rural Agriculture with "ST" overlays to "PUD"
planned unit development to be known as Ronto Livingston
PUD for mixed residential development consisting of not
more than 1,380 dwelling units for property located
generally east of the future Livingston Road, west of
Interstate 75, and immediately contiguous and south of the
Collier/Lee County boundary in Section 7, Township 48
South, Range 26 East and Section 12, Township 48 South,
Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
462.72+ acres. (Companion to DRI-99-02).
em
Petition PUD-99-04, Robert L. Duane, AICP, Hole, Montes and
Associates, representing North Port Development, Inc.
requesting a rezone from ~CON" Conservation and ~RT",
Resort Tourist to ~PUD" Planned Unit Development to be
known as North Port Bay PUD, a residential development not
to exceed 248 multi-family dwelling units, on property
located on the north side of U.S. 41 in Port-Of-The-Islands
in Section 4 and 9, Township 52 South, Range 28 East,
Collier County, Florida, consisting of 49.96+ acres.
De
Petition R-99-8, Mr. Terrance Kepple of Kepple Engineering
representing The Community School of Naples, requesting a
rezone from UA" Rural Agriculture and ~A" with an approved
Conditional Use for a school to "CF" for property located
on the north side of Pine Ridge Road (CR-896) and on the
13
January 25, 2000
Fe
west side of Livingston Road in Section 12, Township 49
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
Petition CU-99-25, Amin Farah of First Stop. Representing
Raida Hamdan, requesting conditional use "13" of the C-4
Zoning district for a bus stop for property located at the
corner of Boston Avenue and First Street in Immokalee,
further described as Lots 11 and 12, Block 1, Carson
Subdivision in Section 4, Township 47 South, Range 29 East,
Immokalee, Florida, consisting of 1+/- acres.
Petition V-99-08, James M. McGann, representing Society of
St. Vincent De Paul Thrift Store, requesting a 15-foot
variance from the required 15-foot side yard setback to 0
feet for property located at 3196 Davis Boulevard, further
described as Lot 133, Naples Grove & Truck Company's Little
Farm #2, in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County, Florida.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO
THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE AT 77&-8383.
14
January 25, 2000
January25,20000
Item #3
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA - APPROVED WITH
CHANGES
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Good morning. Welcome to the
Tuesday, January 25 --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: We are not live yet here on Radio
City.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Good morning, and welcome to
the Tuesday, January 25 meeting of the Board of County
Commissioners.
With our invocation this morning, we have Pastor David Lewis
of the First Baptist Church of Naples.
PASTOR LEWIS: Let's pray together, please.
Father, we come to you this morning to seek your wisdom, to
seek your grace, Father, to thank you also, Father, for the
privilege of just living in this day that you have made, and what I
pray for the men and women of this board, that God, you would
give them incredible wisdom straight from your heart and from
your mind. As, Father, issues are discussed and debated and
decisions made, Father, may they be made in the wisdom of God.
We thank you, Father, for this privilege. In Jesus' name,
amen.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: If you would loin
pledge to the flag.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Good morning, Mr.
me in the
McNees. I
understand we have some changes to the agenda this morning?
MR. McNEES: We do, Mr. Chairman. We have one item to
add, which will become Item 9-A. That's something we put on at
the county attorney's request regarding expert fees.
We have three continuances. The first is Item 8-B-4, we are
continuing at the petitioner's request. This is a sewer impact fee
review hearing. We have Item 12-B-1 that's also being continued
at the commissioner's request, both of these until the meeting of
February the 8th.
Page 2
Janua~ 25,20000
We have one other item that we are asking that you continue
to February the 25th, which is Item t3-A-3. We have an unusual
circumstance here. Somewhere between our submittal of this
item and the actual printing of the agendas, some of the backup
material was missing from the printed copies, and we don't really
know why, but this needs to be continued and re-advertised for
that reason because you haven't actually been able to see the
backup.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: When will that be continued to?
You said February 25th, which is a Friday.
MR. McNEES: That will be to February the 25th.
Well, then, I don't know what I'm talking about, do I? How
about the 22nd?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Sounds good to me.
Anything else?
MR. McNEES: One other item I probably need to explain, just
since there's some confusion this morning. The newspaper
indicated that one of your proclamations, I guess it would be
5-A-3, would be actually continued this week. When
Commissioner Constantine and I talked -- Constantine and I talked
about that proclamation last week, we had not been able to
contact the representatives of the NAACP and wanted them to be
satisfied that what was proposed was to their liking, and we had
discussed that if we were unable to make that contact before
today's meeting, we would go ahead and withdraw that until that
contact could be made.
Apparently, Commissioner Constantine had made that
contact. I was not aware of that. I made the decision yesterday,
for that reason, to hold it off until that had been done. For that
reason,
discussion,
CHAIRMAN
anything?
MR. WEIGEL:
it remains on your agenda
CONSTANTINE: Mr.
I may have one thing.
this morning for your
Weigel, do you have
I would appreciate it if
the board would add a county attorney agenda item, but it would
be an item to be heard only if necessary as the last item of the
day, and it pertains to the upcoming tourist tax straw ballot
Page 3
January25,20000
question on the -- coming up for the election in March.
I've been informed by supervisor of elections, Mary Morgan,
that they had had a problem with the length of part of the
response, the for and against part on both the English and Spanish
translations that they haven't been able to work out yet, but if
they work it out during the course of the day, they'll tell me. If
they can't work it out, we will ask the board to amend its
resolution for the ballot question response in the for and against,
and that will be very simply done, much simpler than I just
explained it to you, at the end of the day if we need to do it.
So, that would be a tentative add-on
agenda item.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: So, what
proclamation that you were talking about, Mr. McNees?
off?
of a county attorney
is the status of the
Is it on or
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm reading it.
MR. McNEES'. It is on the agenda.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: On and off.
Commissioner Berry, do you have any changes?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Yes, I think we need to -- on the
proclamation 5-A-3, has anyone checked with the judiciary?
MR. McNEES: I can say that we have not. That was probably
an oversight on our part.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I'd like to table this for two weeks,
and I think we need to talk to the judiciary and perhaps get a
committee to work with the NAACP and the judiciary and see
what we can come up with on this particular item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why would they object? I mean,
what could they possibly --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Have you spoken with the
judiciary?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I have.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And they have -- they would like a
delay?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: They didn't ask for a delay because
it was my understanding that this was going to be pulled off, as of
Page 4
January25,20000
yesterday anyway.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I can't imagine why they would
object.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, I think it would be only--
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I'm not going to sit up here -- I don't
think it's appropriate to debate the issue at this point, but I think
someone --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: No, we're just discussing
whether or not we're going to continue the item. I don't support
continuing the item for two weeks.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Neither do I.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS:
judiciary does want to have
forward with it.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
Jim.
I support continuing it because the
some input on this before we go
BERRY: Right.
MAC'KIE: That makes you the deciding vote,
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I had a call from Judge Blackwell.
I have not returned that call, but it was my understanding that he
would like it continued to make an input. I don't know what that
input is.
So, I would like to vote deferring it for the two weeks until we
get an input from the --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Why don't I make an alternative
suggestion? Perhaps someone can call Judge Blackwell now, and
we'll just bump it down a couple of items and see if there's a
particular concern.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
do.
MAC'KIE: How about that?
BERRY: I don't think that's the right thing to
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER CARTER:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good, that's three.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Other changes,
Berry?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: No.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
Would you support that, Jim?
I would support that.
Commissioner
Commissioner Norris?
Page 5
Janua~ 25,20000
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: No.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Carter?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: No changes.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Mac'Kie?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
call Judge Blackwell?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
the telephone as we speak. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No changes.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I have no other changes as well.
I'll entertain a motion on the various agendas.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve the agenda,
summary agenda and consent agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion and a second; all those in
favor of the motion, please state aye.
Anybody opposed?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion carries five oh.
Just a question, who's going to
It looks like Mike McNees is on
Page 6
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
JANUARY 25, 2000
ADD: ITEM 9{A} - RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
APPROVE THE EXPERT FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 106A, 106B,
706 AND 806 IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. NAPLES ITALIAN AMERICAN
CLUB, INC. ET AL., CASE NO. 98-1672-CA-01 (AIRPORT ROAD SIX-LANING PROJECT FROM
PINE RIDGE RD. TO VANDERBILT BEACH RD.) (COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REQUEST).
CONTINUE TO 2/8/00 MEETING: ITEM 8{B}{4} - TO CONDUCT A REVIEW HEARING TO
DETERMINE WHETHER SEWER IMPACT FEES ARE APPLICABLE TO REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1500 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL. (PETITIONER'S REQUEST).
CONTINUE TO 2/8/00 MEETING: ITEM 12{B}(1} - PETITION PUD-92-4 BONITA BAY
PROPERTIES REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GOLDEN GATE HEALTH PARK PUD
PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF CR 951 (PETITIONER'S REQUEST).
CONTINUE TO 2/il,g/00 MEETING: ITEM 13{A}{3} - PETITION V-99-21, 7.5 FOOT VARIANCE
TO THE REQUIRED 15 FOOT SIDE SETBACK FOR DOCKING FACILITIES TO 7.5 FEET FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 PELICAN STREET EAST. (STAFF'S REQUEST).
January25,20000
Item #4
MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 8, 1999 TOWN HALL MEETING AND
JANUARY 5, 2000 SPECIAL MEETING - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
Approval of minutes.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I move the approval of the
December 8th, 1999 town hall meeting and January 5th, 2000
special meeting.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: There's a motion and a delayed
second on the approval of the minutes. Any discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor, please state aye.
Motion carries five oh.
Item #5A1
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE VOLUNTEERS OF THE
VETERAN'S TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM - ADOPTED
Proclamations, I have a proclamation. Is Scottie here, Ron
Scott? Come on down.
I understand you've got a number of drivers with us too, if
you'd -- if everybody would come on up.
This is just a fantastic program, and we put in about a zillion
volunteer hours a year.
After we read the proclamation, maybe you'll introduce him in
particular.
We have a proclamation that reads as follows.
All of you please line right up in front of us and face the
cameras,
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Say hi, Mom.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Whereas, Collier County
encompasses an area of over 2,000 square miles; and,
Whereas, there is no Veterans' Administration health care
facility located in Collier County; and,
Whereas, many of our veteran residents have difficulty in
Page 7
January25,20000
getting to medical appointments at VA facilities; and,
Whereas, the Collier County Veterans' Council, in cooperation
with the Collier County Board of Commissioners, provides free
transportation to veterans with appointments at VA hospitals and
out- patient clinics; and,
Whereas, in 1999, the Veterans' Transportation Program
logged 134,287 accident free miles, the accident free part alone is
better than me, carried 764 passengers on 364 trips, that
averages out to about a trip a day, and volunteers donated over
2,500 hours; and,
Whereas, without the volunteer drivers and office staff, this
program could not provide the necessary and important service of
making sure veterans are able to keep their medical
appointments.
Now therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida on behalf of the citizens
of Collier County, that we express our appreciation and our thanks
to the volunteers of the Veterans' Transportation Program for
their time and their efforts on behalf of the veterans of Collier
County.
Done and ordered this 25th day of January, 2000. Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Timothy J.
Constantine, Chair.
I'll make a motion we approve the proclamation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: There's a motion and a second.
All those in favor, please state aye.
Motion carries five oh.
(Applause}.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Scottie, if you want to do --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: These are the men that we owe
so much to already, and then they continue and continue and
continue to serve the community. We so sincerely thank you.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you very much, commissioners.
Not only being the president of the Veterans' Council, I do
volunteer in the office at the transportation office, and it's an
Page 8
Janua~ 25,20000
honor and it's a privilege to be here this morning to get this
proclamation, and without our drivers, as Tim had stated, this
program would not be here.
Also, we have our coordinator who puts together everything
and all the trips and everything, Gunning Cummings and also Kay
Flynn that works in the office and Dick Hartley. I would like to
thank them for all their good work also, and one other thing, we --
one of our first drivers was Dick Futo, who is here today, and he
has logged in almost 70,000 miles since he has been driving for
US,
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you all very, very much.
Item #5A2
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 2000
BE DESIGNATED AS LEAVE A LEGACY MONTH - ADOPTED
Commissioner Norris, you have a proclamation designating
Leave a Legacy month.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I certainly do. I'd like to see if
Barbara Kent and Steve Benson are here.
MR. BENSON: I am. I'm not sure where Barbara Kent is.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, we'll try to go it alone here, if
you'll come up and stand in front and face the cameras, we'll read
this proclamation for you.
The proclamation reads: Whereas, between now and the
early 21st century, an estimated 11 to 12 trillion dollars will be
passed on from estates; and
Whereas, charity is receiving a decreasing share of the
monies from wealthy estates, with more than 80 percent of the
nation's wealthiest individuals leaving nothing to charity; and,
Whereas, only 5.71 percent of households surveyed by a
National Committee on Planned Giving intend to plan a charitable
bequest; and
Whereas, no single charity in Collier County has the
resources to mount a large-scale public education program about
Page 9
Januaw 25,20000
the benefits and ease of arranging charitable bequests; and,
Whereas, the Community Foundation of Collier County is the
cornerstone of charitable giving in the community, having given
more than 5.5 million in grants to area not-for-profit groups since
1985; and,
Whereas, the Naples Council on Planned Giving, in
collaboration with the Community Foundation, area nonprofits,
financial and legal estate planning professionals, and corporate
funders, is launching Leave a Legacy, a program to encourage
charitable giving through their estates from people from all walks
of life.
Now therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of
February, 2000 be designated as Leave a Legacy month.
Done and ordered this 25th day of January 2000 by the Board
of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Timothy J.
Constantine, Chairman, and Mr. Chairman, I'll move that we
accept this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Second.
A motion and a second. All
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
those in favor, please state aye.
Motion carries five oh.
(Applause).
MR. BENSON: I just want to say thank you very much. This
is a community based effort to raise the level of awareness that
people can very easily leave charitable gifts in their estate, and it
does a lot of good in our community.
Thank you very much.
Item #5B
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS - PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We'll defer the next item, and
we'll go to service awards, which is Barbara Berry.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: This morning I am pleased, we have
Page 10
Janua~ 25,20000
six service awards, and the first individual is in our wastewater
treatment plant, would be Joyce Staiger for five years. Joyce.
Next is Joseph Pierre in transportation, five years.
John Presas, five years in parks and recreation, and last in
the five year category is Michael Ossorio for contractor licensing.
Michael.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's a busy job in this county,
huh.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
enforcement.
COMMISSIONER BERRY:
You've been paroled out of code
Next, for ten years in the
transportation department, Albert Pesillo.
And certainly not the least, our last one is road and bridge,
Richard Winans, 15 years, so he's halfway home.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you, Commissioner Berry.
Item #8A1
1999 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT ON PUBLIC
FACILITIES (AUIR) AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 3.15.6 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE - REPORT
APPROVED; CATEGORY A & B FACILITIES INCLUDED IN THE
NINTH CIE UPDATE & AMENDMENT - APPROVED; 1999 AUIR
ADEQUATE CATEGORY 'A' PUBLIC FACILITIES TO BE AVAILABLE
FOR APPROXIMATELY 12 MONTHS UNTIL THE 2000 AUIR -
APPROVED
I bet Stan Litsinger is here for the next item, which is
presentation to the Board of County Commissioners of the '99
annual update and inventory report on public facilities.
MR. LITSINGER: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
commissioners. For the record, Stan Litsinger with the planning
department.
This morning I'd like to present to you your 1999 annual
update and inventory report on public facilities, which is required
by Section 3.15 of your land development code and state statutes.
As we make this presentation today and ask you to make
Page 11
Janua~ 25,20000
some decisions, we will be meeting the requirements for our
annual concurrency test, and we will establish the fact that we
do, in fact, have critical facilities for the next 12 month period.
If there's no questions on the general procedure, I'd like to
touch upon a few highlights of the report, then I'll open it up to
your questions.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Questions for Mr. Litsinger
before we get started on the detail items?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Nothing out of procedure.
MR. LITSINGER: A couple of highlights I'd like to point out. If
you would turn to Page 19 of the transportation database. I had
distributed to your office readable versions of this because your
agenda package is barely, due to the reduction, is unable to
decipher it. I'd like to point out the revenues on Page 19.
For your information, we are able to identify a 15 million
dollar surplus in your five year funding plan as a result of your
decision on February the 11th, excuse me, January 11th to
increase the impact fee rate schedule by an average of 78
percent. This report was, in fact, delayed in order that we could
incorporate this fee schedule into the calculation of revenues.
Also, I'd like to point out to you on Page 19 of your agenda
item, also this reflects the sunsetting of the five cent local option
gas tax on December 31st, '03. It also does not reflect the grade
separation improvements which may be recommended to you as a
result of Project Number 139, which was a grade separation
study.
Furthermore, it also includes a 17 million dollar bond issue in
the current fiscal year, which at the date of this report has not
been -- no revenues have been realized, nor has an amortization
table been incorporated into your expense structure.
With that, I would ask you to approve the schedule of road
improvements, Schedule C, to go into your capital improvement
element.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
Schedule C?
Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Questions for Mr. Litsinger on
Fifteen million dollar surplus in
Page 12
January25,20000
the five year road construction program? MR. LITSINGER: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And that -- you assume that the
gas tax sunsets?
MR. LITSINGER: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. Help me understand how
that matches up with what Mr. McNees told us a few months go
about the 40 million, 80 million dollar deficit?
MR. LITSINGER: The report that I'm showing you today is a
five year report. The deficit I believe that has been mentioned
relates to the MPO 20 year plan. It also relates to the 10 year plan
-- 10 year plan, excuse me. It also relates to the possible addition
in the future of some of these grade separation improvements
which we have not identified today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why do you describe those as
possible when they are on the plan?
MR. LITSINGER: Well, because they are not in this five year
plan. This is a five year plan.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, we don't have any grade
separations planned to be built in the next five years? MR. LITSINGER: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we have an extra 15 million
dollars. Guys, that doesn't make sense.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: My question is, maybe we should.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah, because it just doesn't
make sense. I mean, I understand that this is a form that we have
to go through that the state gives to you, but I'm asking you for
meaningful information.
Are you telling me we have an extra 15 million dollars in the
next five years?
MR. LITSINGER: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: It gets chewed
thereafter.
MR. LITSINGER: I'm telling you just the opposite.
that that 15 million will disappear very quickly.
up shortly
I'm afraid
As Mr. Kant has just pointed out to me, in the succeeding
reports in this coming five years, we will see these grade
Page 13
January25,20000
separation improvements added to this report as a result of study
on Project 139, and we will probably show significant deficits.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Here's -- the reason I'm
questioning about this, board members, is that we take this report
every year, and we smile and nod when we get this report in. It's
a form that has to be filed with the state, and I understand that,
but it could be extremely significant if we found -- let me see if I
understand this right, Stan. If we found that we are deficient
instead of that we have a surplus, then the next community that
comes in for 2,000 homes might get turned down because we
have a deficit instead of a surplus, because we would have
inadequate facilities for that 2,000 units, perhaps.
So, this is a really significant -- you know, we go through it
kind of rubber stamp like, but it's a really significant document
because it tells us whether or not we have the right to say no to
more development; is that accurate? MR. LITSINGER: Partially.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: It's a piece of that puzzle.
MR. LITSINGER: It's a piece of the puzzle.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, for you to tell us then that we
have a 15 million dollar surplus in roads really troubles me, even
though I don't suggest for a second that you're telling us anything
other than exactly what the formula prescribes, but we're going to
be using this. This will be a piece of the puzzle that allows further,
further, further, further, further development when we all know
that the roads are inadequate for our preference, whether they
match this little formula or not.
So, is the formula good for our county?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Stan, let me take a crack at this.
We have -- obviously, we collect money with the look toward the
long-term, not toward any particular window. We don't normally
collect money for five years.
At the end of five years, which is what this particular form
requires, it happens to show a surplus. I think what we'll probably
see as Stan goes on, and particularly with our planning staff, is as
you get to those out years, we hit the numbers Mr. McNees is
talking about, so we'll still have the opportunity to question
Page 14
January25,20000
growth and question growth management issues as part of that.
There are different schedules. This schedule happens to be
the five year road schedule. If you look just solely at that, there's
a surplus. Nobody, us or the state, only looks at that. We are
required to file this one, but this is only one piece of that big
picture.
MR. LITSINGER: If I might add, Mr. Chairman, also relative to
the issue of concurrency and the issue of additional permits, the
15 million dollar surplus notwithstanding and the need to possibly
add particularly grade separation improvements in coming years.
All of those segments, if you will, on this particular schedule,
which are showing a potential or current deficiency status within
the next three year period, are funded, which is the critical test
for concurrency.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And that's back, I guess -- and I'll
let this go --it's just when the growth management laws were
adopted, concurrency laws, which is what we are measuring here,
concurrency was supposed to be the measuring stick that we
didn't have to worry anymore about whether or not development
would proceed beyond the limits of the infrastructure because the
measurements of concurrency would put up a stop sign if we
didn't have adequate infrastructure in place, but my experience
with the concurrency measuring tool has been that it doesn't do
an adequate job to actually serve that function, and every year I
keep trying to understand why it doesn't, but it just doesn't, and
maybe it's the flaw in the law that says if you're funded in the next
five years, that's good enough.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I don't think that's what the law
says.
All you're asking --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, it is. It is what the law says.
I mean, ask them.
MR. LITSINGER: If I can just elaborate just a little bit. Under
this report, if under the test that we have in our concurrency
statutes, which are as strict as the state and required due to a
lawsuit settlement some years ago, if any of the segments that
are apparently deficient, are projected to be deficient, did not
Page t5
January25,20000
have a construction program in the three year period, the first
three years in which they are deficient, I would come to you and
tell you that surrounding that particular segment, we would be
recommending that a -- staff would be recommending a
moratorium.
Today, we do not have that situation around any particular
segment.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because we have funding
scheduled --
MR. LITSINGER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- for the next three to five years?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And rather than get into a deep
philosophical light of it --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I understand.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: -- all you're asking at this
particular instance in time is, is there any objection to Schedule C
as it appears in our agenda?
MR. LITSINGER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Is there any objection to
Schedule C?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: There is not.
MR. McNEES: I would point out one other piece of
information. So you understand the numbers, that 15 million dollar
balance forward at the end of the five years includes a 17 million
dollar bond issue. So, not all of that is current year revenue.
Some of that is borrowed money.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Right.
MR. McNEES: So, it's not all just money that we've collected,
we've got in surplus.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Stan, you've got more?
MR. LITSINGER: Yes. A couple other highlights, if you will.
Page 41 of your agenda package on this item, I feel it's my
obligation to point out to you relative to the solid waste situation
that staff feels that we are quickly approaching a critical mass, if
you will, relative to our concurrency status on solid waste.
If you would look at the -- on Page 41, Pages 42, 43 and 44,
we have the latest analyses of our available capacity at the
Page 16
January25,20000
landfill, both on 10 year land capacity and available cell usage.
I'm afraid that we will have to report to you next year that we are
in a potential concurrency crisis without some action on the part
of the board to increase the capacity. We would ask that the BCC
direct the solid waste department to develop a remedial plant
with alternative solutions to avoid a solid waste concurrency
deficiency under the provisions of the state statutes and our own
statutes that were developed prior to FY 03-04.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Any objection to that?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: None.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: As long as we have input on that
remedial plan, I have no objection.
MR. LITSINGER: And your direction is to ask staff to develop
some remedial plan.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Go do that voodoo that you do so
well.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry, I didn't understand. We
are giving them direction to do something about the landfill?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Recommended action, that the
BCC direct the solid waste department to develop a remedial plan
with alternative solutions to avoid a solid waste concurrency
deficiency under the provisions of Chapter blah-blah, blah-blah,
blah-blah.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. LITSINGER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Especially with that legal citation,
that makes me support it.
MR. LITSINGER: One other item, on Page 47 of your agenda
package relative to the county jail, I'd just like to point out that
here again, we would ask for you to direct us to include Project
400, which has been broken down just into additional 240 beds of
cell capacity to be included in the coming comprehensive plan,
and if you're able to, to identify a funding source for that jail
capacity.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And if you're able to is a good part
of that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Any objection to giving staff that
Page 17
Janua~ 25,20000
direction?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Anything else, Start?
MR. LITSINGER: I would need to ask you under your -- back
to your executive summary, if you would please look at
recommendations on Page 2. I ask you to take three separate
motions and votes. Number one, that you accept and approve the
attached document as the '99 updated inventory report on public
facilities.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Second it.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Do we have speakers on the
AUIR?
MR. McNEES: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We have a motion and a second.
Discussion on that?
Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion, please state
aye.
MR. LITSINGER: Number two, which we have already done,
give staff direction by separate motion and vote, one motion and
vote would be fine, actually, due on Category "A' and "B' facilities
relative to staff recommendations for projects and revenue
sources for inclusion in the tenth CIE update and amendment.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: There's a motion and a second.
Any discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion, please state
aye.
Motion carries five oh; and three?
MR. LITSINGER: One last, to find upon analysis, review and
actions taken based on this '99 AUIR that adequate Category "A"
public facilities will be available as defined by Collier County
concurrency management system, as implemented by Division
3.15 of the land development code, to support development order
issuance until presentation of the 2000 AUIR approximately 12
months from this day.
Page 18
Janua~ 25,20000
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Second it.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion from Commissioner
Norris, second from Commissioner Berry. Discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion, state aye.
Anybody opposed?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: You don't think there's adequate
inventory for the next 12 months?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Okay. Motion carries four one.
Thank you, Mr. Litsinger.
Item #8A2
COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION PERMIT NO. 59.720, "PANTHER
ISLAND MITIGATION BANK", BOUNDED ON THE NORTH AND
WEST BY UNDEVELOPED LAND ZONED AG-2 (LEE COUNTY), AND
ON THE SOUTH AND WEST BY VACANT LAND ZONED A-MHO
(CORKSCREW SWAMP SANCTUARY) - CONTINUED TO THE
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22, 2000
Next item, 8-B -- I'm sorry, 8-A-2, recommendation to approve
commercial excavation permit, Panther Island.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, while that's coming up, I
noticed some people from court administration here. I wonder if
they have an answer on our Martin Luther King --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Mark, are you here for that
purpose?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I was just here to monitor--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Wishful thinking.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Good morning.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Good morning, commissioners. Start
Chrzanowski with the development services department, and I'm
here about the Panther Island mitigation bank.
Panther Island mitigation bank, if you're familiar with the
mitigation bank concept, it is to create large contiguous tracts of
Page 19
Janua~ 25,20000
ecologically viable land and put them aside for future use by
creating the mitigation bank and removing it from the possibility
of development.
Now, this bank here is a total of about 2,778 acres, 640 acres
to the square mile. It's just a little over four square miles. Over
here at the board, you can see the Panther Island mitigation bank
sits -- it's this pink parcel. The green is the Corkscrew Swamp
Sanctuary, and I don't know how well you can pick it up, but if you
look here, the areas of environmental concern, you'll see that a lot
of the bank is -- was a long time ago defined as an area of
environmental concern, but the north portion here is not. It butts
up against Lee County on two boundaries, and it butts up against
the Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary in the back.
If we go to the visualizer, you'll see that the mitigation bank
covers this area here, and up to the north, you have Carter -- I'm
sorry, Six L's Road here and Carter Road here. Those are the only
two really viable access points to the mitigation bank.
The reason that this project is before the Board of County
Commissioners, in the definition portion of the land development
code, not in the excavation portion, the definition of an
excavation is digging a hole more than three feet deep over any
area or digging a hole less than three feet deep over more than
10,000 square feet, which is about a quarter acre.
What they are doing out here is they're going to dig 462 point
something acres out of the 270 -- or 2,778 acres, but that 462
acres is an old farm field. The maximum depth is going to be only
two and a half feet, an average depth of about one foot three
inches. Usually when you do any type of construction, you're
stripping out the first six inches because that's where the
organics are. The material that comes out of this is probably
going to be used for fill, some of it, maybe usable for house pad,
road type fill, whatever. It's hard to tell because of the nature of
the surface, and the areas that are being cleared are the old farm
fields that were not the environmentally sensitive areas that the
rest of the project is.
Now, again, it's up before you because it's technically a
commercial excavation. Now, commercial doesn't necessarily
Page 20
January25,20000
mean that this part of the project makes money. As with any
project, even if you had a residential development, this area here,
I assume you can have like 500 units at five units -- or one unit to
five acres. The excavation portion might not make money, but the
rest of the project will, but that is not what's -- the reason that
this is up in front of the board. It's up in front of the board
because we define a commercial excavation as an excavation
where the fill is removed from the site.
Now, when you dig out these farm fields, you can't put the fill
on the environmentally sensitive portions of the site, so it has to
be hauled off site, and it's going to be hauled up two roads, Six L's
Road and Carter Road, both of which are in Lee County. I have
been told that there is a representative from the Lee County DOT
named Comber Taylor in the audience, so I assume if you have
any questions for him later, he'll be glad to answer them.
All the road impacts are to Lee County. I -- when this item
went in front of the Environmental Advisory Council, there was not
a quorum that could vote on the item, so they passed along the
minutes of their meeting, which was added into the agenda
packet. We had a lot of residents from the Lee County portion of
this project that wanted to address the EAC, and I assume that a
lot of them are in the commission chambers right now.
We have the petitioner, Tim Durham here to make a
presentation on the project if you have -- I'm done with my part. If
you have any questions for me about the mechanics of why we
are here, I'll be glad to answer them.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Questions for staff?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Stan, what would this do in terms of
the -- those are CREW lands, right?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I mean, it's next door-- next door --
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: It's next door to Corkscrew Swamp, and
Ed Carlson, who is the manager of Corkscrew Swamp, is on the
Environmental Advisory Council, and if you look, I think it's on
Page 33 of your EAC staff report, maybe the bottom of the page,
top of the next page, he is in favor of the project.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: So, this would add how much to
Page 21
Janua~ 25,20000
that CREW project; another 20 -- how many acres is this?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: You'd have to ask Tim Durham how
that's being worked out. I'm not familiar with the legalities.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Mr. Durham.
We have Bruce Anderson going to make
Accepting the award on behalf of Mr. Durham.
MR. ANDERSON: Good morning,
the presentation.
Mr. Chairman,
commissioners. For the record, my name is Bruce Anderson from
Young, Van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson on behalf of the
applicant.
Also present today are Rob Miller, manager of the Panther
Island mitigation bank, and as Mr. Chrzanowski mentioned, our
environmental consultant for the project, Tim Durham, of the
Wilson, Miller firm.
The application before you is for natural resource protection
and restoration uses in the form of a wetlands mitigation bank on
lands that this commission has identified and designated as a
natural resource protection area. This is exactly the type of use
that is encouraged in a natural resource protection area. It's my
understanding, which just has been confirmed, that these lands
are also on the CREW acquisition list.
If this excavation permit is approved, these lands will be
restored and placed in a conservation easement dedicated to the
water management district and become part of the overall CREW
lands system without any expenditure of public funds.
This mitigation bank has been reviewed and approved over
the past 21 months by a host of federal and state agencies,
including specifically the Army Corps of Engineers and the South
Florida Water Management District. It will consist of 2,778 acres
of wetland marshes and hydric pine flat woods. Four hundred
sixty-two of these acres are old agricultural fields, which would
be scraped down and the dirt hauled away to create critical
foraging habitat for wading birds such as the wood stork. Exotic
vegetation will also be removed from the wetlands to rehabilitate
those.
I note for the record today that the maximum amount of dirt
to be hauled away under the permit application is amended to
Page 22
January25,20000
as they do
neighboring
restoration
breeding.
reduce the amount by 80,000 cubic yards, from 850,000 to
770,000. I'd also note for the record that the access to the site
under the traffic projections that we have done, 75 percent of the
dirt to be hauled away will utilize Carter Road, and 25 percent of
the dirt to be hauled away would utilize Six L's Road.
The only opposition has come from rural Lee County
residents who don't want additional traffic on the two private
roads, which my client has easement rights to use just as much
for access. In reviewing the EAC transcript, one
resident even complained about the creation or
of wetlands as leading to increased mosquito
These Lee County residents have made their concerns known
to my client and to Lee County Development Services staff, and
my client has met several times with representatives of the
residents and with Lee County staff to try and address those
concerns. Lee County staff has proposed stipulations to Collier
County staff to be included. They are in your agenda packet, and
all of those stipulations have been agreed to by my client. In the
interest of brevity, I will not highlight those. You can read them
for yourself.
And finally and most importantly, the Panther Island
mitigation bank site would provide vital wetland and wildlife
corridor links between the CREW Trust lands on the west and
south and National Audubon's Corksrew Swamp Sanctuary on the
east.
We'll be happy to answer any questions --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Questions for Mr. Anderson?
MR. ANDERSON: -- you may have.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Seeing none, do we go to -- we
do have some public speakers on this item.
MR. McNEES: Yes, you have about half a dozen.
I'll call two speakers at a time. If the second speaker would
be prepared as the first is finished.
Your first will be Jim Lytell who will be followed by Wayne
Kelly.
Page 23
Januaw 25,20000
MR. LYTELL: Good morning. I'm Jim Lytell. I live on Glades
Farm Road, which I have to access Six L's Road -- our road runs
into Six L's.
My feelings about this, running these dump trucks up and
down our dirt road, which isn't very well maintained already by --
the farm runs many, many trucks, hundreds of trucks during their
harvesting times. The dust problem is -- it's incredible. The EPA
is on their case, going to be on their case now about raising so
much dust until there's dust hanging in the air at seven; six, seven
o'clock at night. The road's bumpy. It just isn't up to this kind of
commercial traffic.
Now, we can tolerate the road. We live on it. We're not
making money on it. We don't have any commercial interest in
using our road. I mean, it's dangerous. There's about 12 little
roads and driveways that run into this two mile stretch of Six L's
Farm Road, and there's schoolchildren, school buses. There's all
kinds of -- you know, people are interacting in and out of these
roads all day long, and it's just dangerous. Four people, I think,
went into the ditch. There's a culvert or a swale that runs right
beside the road three feet -- I think three vehicles were in the
ditch last week alone because the farm's harvesting now, and
they are running -- I saw five semis on the road at one time going
to work one morning at seven o'clock, and they are probably, if I
may judge the speed, 30, 35 miles an hour down a probably 30
foot wide dirt road, washboard road.
The panther mitigation has suggested improving the road.
Our road is fine. We don't want any more commercial traffic on
our road, and the mosquito issue that he said, I was the one that
brought that up. Who's to say they don't make a mosquito
incredible? They are going to have all these wetlands less than
three-eighths of a mile from where I live, and they say fish, who's
going to monitor all that? Who's going to monitor all this traffic?
We don't have speed limit signs on our road. The Lee County
Sheriff doesn't come down and monitor our road unless we call
them, and then they say, how are we going to issue speeding
tickets. There's no speed, and it's just -- we feel like this is just an
encroachment where they had this project in another county, and
Page 24
Janua~ 25,20000
we don't have any interest in this project, and it -- pass that, we
just throw ourselves on your mercy more or less.
It seems like we are kind of between -- we don't have any
entity to defend us on this issue. Three of the commissioners on
the other board were involved in the project, so they had to
disqualify themselves. They couldn't vote on it. That's how it got
here, and I thank you for my time.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Mr. Kelly will be followed by?
MR. McNEES: David Dawson.
MR. KELLY: I'm Wayne Kelly. I'm a resident of Six L's Farm
Road for 20 years.
I'm against this project strictly because of the dump trucks
coming down the road. I understand mitigation. I understand
mitigation works well, you know, the development end.
The safety, welfare of the residents, our quiet enjoyment, you
know, of living out there so long is going to change drastically. I
mean, imagine yourself -- you know, the kids that come to the end
of these small roads that Jim mentioned, you know, on their four
wheelers, and these trucks are going by, the dust issue -- the
other issue is when it's wet.
I mean, the mitigation people have spoken in a letter form -- I
think we had one meeting outside the door here last time, but that
they would water and grade the road and all. Well, it's impossible
to grade a road when it's wet, and if a dump truck goes down
there, it's going to cut ruts. These people have cars. You know,
it's just not set up -- you know, the farm has maintained the road
over the years somewhat, but everybody's -- you know,
everybody's there, and we're living there.
The real issue I see here is, and I didn't understand it before,
mitigation is set up to make money for the landowner. The
landowner obviously went and got a permit. No one was notified
there. I mean, if I was in that situation, I would have come and
talked to the residents and let them know what they're doing, but
we never knew about this. They obtained a permit, and in their
permit, it says they have to remove that dirt. Now, I assume
whatever agency did that, that is the permit. If they don't remove
that dirt, I don't think they get a permit, you know, to continue
Page 25
Janua~ 25,20000
this.
I think something I read, there's close to 970 something
credits at anywhere from 30,000 plus -- you know, I mean, we are
talking in the 30 million dollar range, but yet they are going to run,
you know, they're going to run the dump trucks on a private dirt
road, like I said, where residents live. I have to listen to them all
the time, and it's a pure safety issue with me. We've got kids on
the corner at a bus stop, and on a graded road situation, a marl
road like, excuse me, this, a loaded dump truck -- I mean, if a kid
is just playing, they can't stop. It's not pavement.
The other issue is -- and we've tried. We don't know where to
go. We have no -- I mean, the first eight of us actually own the
road. We own to the ditch. Six L's owns the rest of the road by
title. There is no easement. When we say this road, Six L's built
this road 25 some odd years ago, and back then, you just went out
there and built a road, but there is no easement. They don't have
title to go, you know, do anything to the road. I mean, we've got --
investigated this.
Our only alternative is to hire an attorney and to fight this in
the courts, other than you, you know, to impose restrictions on
them. Basically we would not like to see the dump trucks come
down here.
I mean, it's been mentioned, you know, to get the road paved
or whatever, I'm against dump trucks totally because I live there,
and I think it just comes down to a money issue, and these -- the
engineers and the people that are doing a good job on the
mitigation, and the way I see it is, if they don't get this dirt out of
there, it might affect their permit, which goes back to money
again, but they are not seeing our point of view, you know, of the
quality of life and just pure safety, and there's no -- I mean, I don't
think we can even post a speed limit, and all these issues that
we're going to grade and water and the things they say they're
going to do, who's going to police the dump trucks? Once they
leave that site, and this is a private road, no one can control that
the way I see it.
So, it's up to you guys to do something.
Yes, ma'am.
Page 26
Januaw 25,20000
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just a question, I'm trying to
understand why the dump trucks for excavation are worse than if
they had -- if they were farming and they were taking truckloads
of tomatoes or something?
MR. KELLY: Well, it's worse added to the fact that they put
more traffic on an already unbearable situation.
We had a meeting with Six L's Friday night, you know, trying
to do something about the dust, and there's an issue there
basically who owns the road and who is supposed to control it. I
mean, they have graded it on their own.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah, but my question is, why
would - if this -- if they farmed the farm lands and hauled
truckloads of tomatoes instead of truckloads of dirt, wouldn't you
be in the same position you are in now?
MR. KELLY: No, ma'am. It's there -- it was there when I
moved there. This is something new that they're doing -- they are
adding another risk, to me. Dump trucks, I mean -- go ahead.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Yes, sir, but you see, if they
continue to farm this property, it will be there for the rest of your
lifetime if you live there. You're going to have farm trucks going
out in front of your house.
MR. KELLY: I do. I go by it every day.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: However, however, if this project
goes through, they'll haul that dirt out of there, and when they're
done, there ain't no more trucks, period.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And it will be a beautiful --
MR. KELLY: Is it worth one kid's life? I mean, the dump
trucks is what bothers me.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: That's a weak argument. You're
assuming that we're going to -- that somebody is going to go over
there and run over a kid. Well, a farm truck can do that just as
easy as a dump truck.
MR. KELLY: I agree with you, and we fight -- we fight that
issue daily, too.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I suspect you don't like either of
the trucks, so --
MR. KELLY: But I'm there, and this -- like I said, this is
Page 27
Januaw 25,20000
something -- I mean, no one was ever told what was going on.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
Commissioner Berry.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Commissioners, there is a
stipulation, and should we approve of this, there is a stipulation
here that says all truck traffic shall be suspended during the time
that school buses load in the morning and unload in the afternoon.
MR. KELLY: Who regulates that if they don't; you see? I
mean, there's no dump truck police.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, you know, but we've got
speed limits out here on the roadways too, and, you know --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And who regulates that is it will
become a code enforcement issue. So, if you see a truck during
the time that school buses are running, then you call, they'll give
you the phone number before you leave here, and we send code
enforcement out to --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: It's in Lee County.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, on the road it's Lee County,
that's right.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: It's Lee County.
MR. KELLY: Since I've lived there, we fought two other dirt
issues, one in Section 30, straight across Six L's, and one behind
my house, and in Lee County, they would not allow dump trucks
running down a dirt road for safety reasons. Both of those
projects were denied because of the issue of the dust and the
safety. The one, I think, went to the commission three times, and
finally -- Corkscrew wasn't paved, only to Alico Road back then. It
was three miles. They said, we'll issue the dirt, the excavation
thing, if you'll pave the road, you know, just under the safety
issue. I think Comber Taylor is going to address that, if you'd like
to ask--
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
Next speaker is Mr. Dawson, and he'll be followed by?
MR. McNEES: Mr. Cooper, and I should probably announce
that it's the commission's practice to not accept additional
speakers once an item has begun to be heard, so if there's anyone
for future items that you want to register for, you need to do that
Page 28
Januaw 25,20000
before the commission actually hears that item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And that's posted on the door.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Go ahead.
MR. DAWSON: I'm David Dawson. I want to reiterate
basically what Mr. Kelly said and add a little bit to it.
I did the research on the road. I've had a title insurance
company for about 27 years. There's a big difference between the
access that the farm has and the access that panther thinks they
have.
Number one, there is no easement there. However, because
it's the farm's only access, we are required by law to allow them
to come out that road, okay. The mitigation people have Carter
Road, and I haven't done the research on Carter Road because it
really doesn't pertain to us, but they need to do the -- I believe it is
a deeded access road. Now, that's where the big difference is.
We can't stop the farm because that's their only access, but to
add additional dump trucks and additional truck traffic to burden
our property, I don't think is right. I mean, Mr. Taylor, I'm sure,
will be able to give you more on the condition of that road, but it's
a very bad road. It's washboard. It's --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I ask Mr. Weigel a question?
If, in fact, he's correct and there's not -- I mean, I'm not judging,
but if, in fact, his position is correct and there's not a legal
easement over one of the roads, does that affect our decision
making?
MR. WEIGEL: The answer is no.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's what I thought. I mean,
that's something you have to go fight in a court.
MR. DAWSON: Understood.
MR. WEIGEL: Yours is a land use decision before you today.
MR. DAWSON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And as frustrating as that is,
that's just a question of what authority we do and don't have.
MR. DAWSON: Understood. Okay.
MR. DAWSON: Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Your next speaker is Mr. Cooper, followed by
Bill Lytell.
Page 29
Janua~ 25,20000
MR. COOPER: My name is W. F. Cooper, and I also live on -- I
have a bunch of pictures --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Hang on. If you're going to
speak, you need to be at the microphone. You can hand those
over here, and he'll distribute them.
MR. COOPER: These are just pictures my wife took just last
week on the road of what our problem is.
I've lived on the road 20 some odd years. The road has
always been a problem for the residents there. It's gotten to be a
much greater problem in the last few years because the farm has
expanded pretty dramatically. They've added growth and a few
other things.
Our problem is, my specific problem is dust and safety. The
dust is so bad, as you can see from these photographs, it just rolls
back off this road over our house, through our yard. If you try to
get out there on a Saturday or Sunday and do some work in the
yard, there's a brown cloud of dust up in the trees. You're
breathing it all the time. It's in your eyes.
So, we called the Lee County government, and they
appropriately tell us that the road is private and they can't do
anything about it, but unfortunately, they don't give us any tools to
do anything with enforcement.
The EPA has been complained to, and they've fielded the
complaints with an investigation, and they, too, say the dust is
unacceptable.
Here's the real hard part for us. The EPA says the dust is
unacceptable, but the people responsible for the dust and for the
control of the dust are the residents, and that's us. Now, you put
-- that puts me in a peculiar position of being required by the EPA
to maintain this road dust free for the farm to use, and that's
exactly the position that we are in.
The -- when you add to that mix the enormous number of
dump trucks that are going to be going up and down there for five
years, you get a situation that really will be unacceptable.
When we tried to solve some of these problems already with
Six L's, they called a meeting on Friday night which a group of us
attended. The Six L's corporate representative started the
Page 30
Januaw 25,20000
meeting with the statement that their policy is that the first one
mile of this road is not their responsibility. That's exactly what
they said, and that's the responsibility of the landowners. They
don't own the road. They have no responsibility nor liability for it.
The liability issue is also ours.
So, this puts us, again, in a position, no enforcement, but yet
we've had a statement of a corporate policy that it's not their
problem. Now, we'll have another statement of corporate policy
from the new corporation that says they will take care of this
road, but if they elect not to, we have no recourse. Who do we
call? We call somebody, they tell us it's a private road, it's your
problem; and that's exactly what we are being told over and over
again.
I don't have a problem with the mitigation project, not a bit,
and I don't have a problem with them moving the dirt out of it. If
that's what's required to make this project work, that's fine. My
only problem is the way they remove the dirt.
They have two miles of frontage on additional farms between
Carter Road and Six L's Road. There's a myriad farm roads that
run perpendicular to their property, directly in contact with their
property that could carry them out to Corkscrew Road. They have
to improve them in order to use that road, but -- which is one of
the reasons they want to use our road, because our road, despite
the photographs, is somewhat improved, but they do have other
access. They would just have to spend some money, and they
could run it through. Their answer to that is, well, this other stuff
is private property. Well, so is ours. They have other private
property that they can run their road through that's unoccupied,
only by farms, that would affect no one. We would not complain
about it because we would have nothing to do with it.
You're our only recourse. I don't ask that you turn down their
project. The project has validity. I only ask that you restrict them
in how they remove their dirt and don't let them remove it on our
road. We've got enough problems now, and I don't trust them, as I
don't trust Six L's anymore after their statements on Friday night.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
Page 31
January25,20000
by?
Mr. Lytell is our next speaker, and who will he be followed
MR. McNEES:
MR. LYTELL:
appreciate you -- the offices you're serving to help us.
what government is for, what we are here for today.
I have some petitions signed that -- I have nine
signed.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
your name for the record. MR. LYTELL: Bill Lytell.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. LYTELL: If I may read the petition quickly.
Followed by Cynthia Cooper.
Commissioners, it's a privilege to be here. I
This is
petitions
Mr. Lytell, I just need you to say
As a resident
using Six L's Farm Road, I'm absolutely against commercial use of
this access road to haul dirt with dump trucks from the Panther
Island mitigation bank project. I believe it will be very dangerous
and hazardous for my family's health and safety, especially with
no enforcement or patrolling in place on a private road. Please
help us stop their use of this road for egress and ingress of dump
trucks.
There are approximately nine signed petitions with another --
actually, ten petitions, if I may present them to the board.
Some of the issues that you hear repeated, and these people
are not, by any means, professional speakers. They are not
lawyers. They are not used to addressing this kind of
environment, and it makes you a little nervous, I suppose, and you
say things or repeat yourself, but the issues come down, to me, of
when I'll be able to look at this, is health and safety first of all.
We have approximately 33 children that go -- that pick up or
they are picked up at the end of the road. These dump trucks will
be going right by those children. I come home many times, and
these children are walking home along this dirt road. There's to
be no provision, obviously, from the mitigation people for any kind
of a walkway for them as dump trucks come and go. You folks
are --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There is -- you're aware though
that there's that limitation that they won't operate trucks during
Page 32
January25,20000
the --
MR. LYTELL: Yes, I read that. They said they will not
operate in the hours, I believe a half hour before, half hour after.
In addressing that, that means their -- we called Lee County
schools and got the operating times. Bus pick-up is from 6:21
a.m. to 8:50 a.m., from 2:41 p.m. to 5:22 p.m. That gives them
from 9:30 to 2:15. That's about five hours to operate their trucks,
according to our figures, and they may disagree with that
accordingly.
The problem with that is -- you know, they talked about
hauling out 25 percent of their fill, 25 of the dirt out our road.
According to their letter to us, that's 15 trucks a day. In five and
a half hours or five hours, they're going to haul 15 trucks, that's 30
trips in and out of these dump trucks. Now, imagine yourself, your
wife, your husband, whatever, pulling out in front of one of these
dump trucks accidentally -- have you ever seen a dump truck try
to make an emergency stop on gravel? You know it doesn't
happen.
Harper Brothers, Florida Rock, Youngquist Rock all have
paved roads that they use, and, indeed, were required to use,
pave the road to do this type of commercial hauling. What we are
really saying is, they are taking Six L's Farm Road and making a
commercial avenue for hauling out dirt, which is just like Harper
Brothers or just like Florida Rock. We understand there's a limit in
time, but five years is a long time, and 15 trucks a day, five days a
week or six days a week, however they are limited in that area,
we believe that if they are allowed, and you folks can, of course, I
believe, regulate this as a requirement, that if they are going to
access these roads, whether it be Carter or whether it be Six L's,
that they pave that road and make it acceptable for health and
safety so that these vehicles can make emergency stops.
Now, they've talked to us about contributing to that paving.
The problem with the residents is I receive no income whatsoever
from the paving of that road, nothing. They are making -- whether
they like it or not, I mean, they're going to make 35 million or so
dollars on this project. You factor the cost of business in, you
must haul the dirt out to improve the project, so bottom line, if
Page 33
Janua~ 25,20000
you've got to have an access -- you've got to have access, right?
So, the cost of doing business to me would seem reasonable that
they would pave the road, use it for five years, make 35 million
dollars and go home.
The other environmental commission man, one of the men in
the second seat said, we spend about 60 million dollars in saving
33 known panthers, and won't we spend a million dollars to save
33 children? Now I know we can't say whether any of those
children will be harmed, but if, indeed, that happens due to the
fact there cannot be as good a stop by a vehicle like this dump
truck, I know one thing, I'm going to be grieved about it, and all I
can say is we've done what we can.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
sir?
Can I ask you a question, please,
MR. LYTELL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE'. Same question, it may have even
been your brother even that I asked earlier, is I don't understand
why these dump trucks pose more of a concern to you than a farm
truck hauling tomatoes?
MR. LYTELL: Okay. Farm trucks haul about twice a year.
They haul in a very short period of time. They haul their complete
produce out in about a week and a half, two weeks, then it's
quiet, I mean relatively quiet except for just the pick-up trucks, et
cetera. That is really the essence of the difference.
We can -- you know, we live with the week and a half, two
weeks at a time in spring and in the fall. They may even do a third
harvest some years, but really, it's short periods of time that they
-- and that's
do that.
These folks are proposing --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Solid for five years.
MR. LYTELL: -- five years solid, you know, or
what scares me about the whole thing.
So, we are asking you to propose that they go ahead to
improve the road to pavement, I would say to Lee County
standards where it could be taken over publicly after they leave.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And do you understand too -- the
Page 34
Janua~ 25,20000
other thing I just want to say because -- I understand and
appreciate the answer now about the difference between farm
and dump trucks, but it may be that the jurisdiction of this group
is that we have to approve the land use decision or disapprove it,
and then you have to go fight that access question somewhere
else.
MR. LYTEL. L: Okay. I understand your limit there, but this is
an unusual situation where you're bordering and actually -- I would
-- I don't know the law. Of course, I'm not a lawyer, but I know
that if you suggest that a certain thing is done, your power is
pretty far reaching.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
Ms. Cooper will be followed by?
MR. McNEES: Ms. Cooper has actually waived so as not to be
repetitive. Your last two speakers will be David Caster and Wes
Roan.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Ms. Cooper gets bonus points for
that, by the way.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
MR. CASTER: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
commissioners. For the record, my name is David Caster.
county
I live on
Capper L.ane, which is one of the small tributary roads that's off of
Six L's Farm Road.
There's been some questions raised about different parts of
the farming. I understand that you've got that pretty well resolved
in the fact that's very short periods of time, whereas this is a 12
month, 52 week project.
The other thing is the cutting up of the road, and I understand
that we can possibly take that to court and spend a lot of our hard
earned dollars to try to fight this project, but at the same point in
time, you by the stroke of a pen up here can put those conditions
and stipulations on this permit so that we don't have to go to
another access arena to get that taken care of.
It's been pointed out here about the cost of doing business.
As he said, this is a 35 million dollar project, plus or minus. In the
meeting that was held last Friday night, a representative of one of
Page 35
Janua~ 25,20000
the local engineering companies was told that it would cost
approximately $480,000 per mile of road to bring this up to Lee
County codes, and that must be done, as has been touched on
here by several people in the fact that until this road becomes a
county road and is accepted by Lee County, there is no
enforcement by the law enforcement people, be it Florida
Highway Patrol or the Lee County Sheriff's Department, and,
again, who's going to patrol this road, and who's going to make
sure these things happen if it's not one of our local law
enforcement agencies, and I don't think you want to sit up there
and promote people taking the law into their own hands by, you
know, shooting the tires out on the trucks or anything like that.
I'm not here to propose that, but the other thing that you've got to
remember is I have a 14 year old and a 17 year old that walk up
and down or drive up and down that road every day, and I've seen
times when I drove past my son because the dust was so thick
that I couldn't see him walking down the road, and that's a reality
of what the road is like during the dry season. Now, if I couldn't
see my own son, how is a dump truck driver supposed to see
these kids walking down the road? There's no walkway.
As a matter of fact, on the west side of the road, the Brazilian
Peppers hang out over the road to where the kid has to walk out
into the road somewhat to gain access up and down the road.
Now, we try not to have our children walk up and down the roads,
and the other people that bring their kids there are very good
about the fact that they'll pick kids up whose parents may be
running a little late, to take these kids so they don't have to walk
up and down the road, but you guys can sit right up there and with
a stroke of a pen make the condition or stipulation on this permit
that the road be paved, and then it's enforceable by law agencies.
It's safe for the residents, and it's a small fraction of the cost of
doing business, and I'm a businessman. I'm an excavation
contractor by trade. I live out there. I don't take my trucks to my
place out there where I live because the road from time to time
gets so bad that you'll tear the trucks up.
Now, the other thing that has been said is the access of
Carter Road. Well, I have done some work up and down Carter
Page 36
Janua~ 25,20000
Road. Both times I was there, we knocked the mirrors off of our
trucks because it is a single lane road with lots of big potholes in
it and very, very narrow because -- it's so narrow that you knock
the mirrors off the trucks going up and down it.
Now, if you had the choice as an owner of a dump truck
company to take your trucks up and down Carter Road or Six L's
Farm Road, which one would you take? It doesn't take a rocket
scientist to figure out that they're going to take the majority of the
trucks up and down our road.
Now, I think that less than 5 percent of the total revenue of
this project to bring the road up to specifications that we can all
live with is not an unbearable thing to do. Five percent is
peanuts.
Now, they've unloaded a million dollars' worth of equipment
out there in the last week to do this project with. It's a foregone
conclusion it's going to happen because they're stripping the dirt.
It started on Tuesday of this past week.
I mean, I'm not here to say that I think it's not going to
happen. I'm in favor of it. I don't understand it, but I'm in favor of
it because it helps the mitigation and the wetlands. This project
is going to happen. They are already there. They've already got a
million dollars' worth of equipment on-site to do this job, and to
protect the health and well-being of the 33 children, and I don't
think that included my daughter, because she drives, she doesn't
ride the school bus, to protect these kids over five percent of the
total cost of this project is not putting an undue hardship on these
people. They spend a million dollars at the drop of a hat, and I
would hate for you guys to have on your conscience the fact that
one of these kids get hurt or killed simply because we didn't make
them spend a little money to bring this up to code, something that
we could live with.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. CASTER: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And our final speaker?.
MR. McNEES: Wes Roan.
MR. ROAN: Good morning, commissioners. My name is Wes
Roan, for the record.
Page 37
Januaw 25,20000
Everything that I was going to speak about was addressed by
the previous two speakers. I just want to reiterate that the safety
issue is the most important thing, and unless we can get a viable
law enforcement agency to go and look at the road and be present
on the road, that we can't ensure that anything that anybody says
will be done will, in fact, be done.
So, I just wanted to ask that you consider the conditions of
the permit, to possibly amend them or to add to them to facilitate
the necessary fixes of the road to allow law enforcement to be
there to help protect the people that live on the street. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Question for you, sir. You've got
on a Six L's hat. Are you with the farm?
MR. ROAN: I'm employed by the farm, yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is there -- I'm not suggesting you
are, but is there somebody here with the capacity to make a
commitment on their behalf?
I'm interested in seeing this road improved, and I'm
wondering who should share the cost of that.
MR. ROAN: Well, currently, Six L's Farm does maintain the
road. At times when we have equipment or operators available,
we have been known to water the road. When we get a rain like
we finally had over the weekend, we'll actually put a grader out
there and grade the road.
It's in our best interest for the road to be in
condition as possible because our produce has to
down that road.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How long is the road?
MR. ROAN: I believe it's approximately two
Corkscrew to the beginning of Six L's Farm house.
as good a
run up and
miles from
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, it's a million dollars if the four
eighty is in the right --
MR. ROAN: I'm not exactly sure, but it's pretty close. I
believe from the entrance to Panther Island to the road may be
approximately two miles. I'm not sure.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I guess I'm just wondering, board
members -- thank you, sir -- if there's some equitable distribution
Page 38
Janua~ 25,20000
of the cost -- I mean, I don't know that this project should bear all
of the cost of improving the road if there's going to be benefit to a
lot of parties, but it does sound like some kind of improvement, I
don't know if it means it needs to be paved up to Lee County
standards, but some kind of improvement is going to be
appropriate with the impacts of their traffic on the road, that they
ought to have to do something to improve the road.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Does anybody have any
questions for the petitioner or for staff?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I have a question for the
petitioner. If they would be willing to pave in conjunction with Six
L's, or one of the speakers mentioned there was some alternative
routing to remove dirt, and have those been explored? Can you
address those, Bruce? Is there a way to work through this?
MR. ANDERSON: Commissioner, my client has always been
willing to pay its proportionate share to pave Six L's Road.
Nobody else has been able to get their act together, step up to
the plate along with us to bear their proportionate share.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Who would that be?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: What do you perceive as your
proportionate share?
MR. ANDERSON: Well, we'd be using the road for about a five
year period. We'd have to come up with a formula for balancing
our five year use of the road, our wear and tear during that five
years versus the life of the road, expected life and the other users
on there, including the residents and the farm.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Who else would participate in
your judgment; Six L's, obviously?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: No. They would be gone. Why
would they participate?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: It should be the residents along the
boulevard.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry, that's right. Who else
would participate; these people who are here today?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, everyone who uses that road.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Bruce, the question I had on
percentages -- I mean, I understand there's a realistic way to do a
Page 39
Janua~ 25,20000
formula there, what your usage is, what your expected life of the
road is, how long you think you will be there and so on, but surely
you can give us a ballpark figure. I mean, are we talking, do you
think it's :30 percent or 80 percent or -- there's got to be some
idea. I can't imagine this thought has never occurred to you or
your client before this instant.
MR. ANDERSON: I don't have a percentage, and I --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is your client here?
MR. ANDERSON: Yeah, let me check with them. I don't know
if they've come up with any kind of a percentage.
I mean, the offer has been made, and there's been no follow
through from the other folks who would have an interest.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I ask staff a question while
he's --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Start, you guys do this all the time,
because we often approve petitions subject to the proportionate
share. Cost sharing of a road, for example, we do that. I don't
know if it's something that you work with or somebody else on
staff, but is that basically -- how long -- a road is good for 20
years?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: It depends on the design, yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So -- I mean, we could figure out
the life of a road and then the number of trips on the road, and
that's basically how if we were sharing the cost of the road would
determine --
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: There's a factor for the wear and tear
that a truck puts on as opposed to a pick-up, as opposed to a farm
truck, but there was something that Commissioner Norris said
that caught my ear about Six L's is going to be gone.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. They're not, are they?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: This is -- no. The farms in here are not
the Six L's farms. What you're looking at for Six L's, I believe, is
like this square mile here, maybe that square mile. They are
farming land all up and down that road that is not this parcel.
When the time comes, they have a lot of traffic up and down that
road.
Page 40
Januaw 25,20000
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And isn't this where they're going
to build their farm worker housing?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, 200 units of farm worker housing
is ''
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, then they ought to
the cost.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: -- in the works.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Who's -- which
Six L's Road and -- that's Six L's -- MR. CHRZANOWSKI: That yellow line is
line right there.
share in
one -- point to the
Six L's Road, that
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: And the one on the east is --
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: And Carter Road is this road up here.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Just a follow-up to Stan's
comment there. A road may have a 20 year life, but that's a
typical regular street, not necessarily a road that is almost
exclusively used for trucking purposes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I've got you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: But for this project, it's almost like
a throwaway road if we're saying a five year life span for the one
major section that they are looking at.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Mr. Anderson.
MR. ANDERSON: If all the other parties participate, we would
perceive our share of the cost to be 20 percent. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, Bruce.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Well, I'm not going to waste a
whole lot of time here debating over what the percentage is. I'm
not going to support the petition if you only think 20 percent of
that is your responsibility.
So, you can either come up with a realistic number or we can
have a motion, but we are not going to spend the whole morning
talking about whether or not you should come up with what
percentage of that road.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And my thought was going to be
that if you came -- if you had a reasonable percentage, I thought
we were talking 80 percent, the flip side, but if you were to come
Page 41
January25,20000
to a reasonable percentage, if you thought that 80 percent of that
road was your responsibility, then my question was going to be,
will your client commit the $800,000 regardless of whether
anybody else participates, because you're going to be impacting
that road so significantly, I would like to ask your client to spend
to improve the road in an amount of dollars equal to an
appropriate proportionate share that I think is somewhere in the
80 percent, because this road, again, it's not a 20 year road. It's
going to be maybe an eight or ten year road with the kind of
impact your guys are going to have on it. You're going to be most
of the traffic. You're certainly going to be most of the serious
traffic for the next five years, you should have to put down
something that would support your use, if that's $500,000, but it's
some number, and you should have to put that amount of money
into improving that road.
MR. ANDERSON: We've always been willing to discuss that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, we are discussing it now.
MR. ANDERSON: I know, but you're --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And it ain't 20 percent.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: What's the pleasure of the board,
because we are not going to spend --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I would support a motion
that there has to be some formula that would work this out, while
I'm not willing to go with supporting the approval of this unless
there is some way to get that road taken care of on a shared basis
between the farmers and the excavating company.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I agree.
Commissioner Berry.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Commissioner Constantine, I think
that we ought to continue this until there can be some kind of an
agreement worked out on this roadway situation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that a motion?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I'll make that into a motion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Continue it indefinitely, is that
the --
COMMISSIONER BERRY: No, continue it for --
Page 42
Januaw 25,20000
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Two weeks.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: -- two weeks -- well, I don't know if
they're going to be able to get it done in two weeks, but I'd like
two weeks, but probably the second meeting in February might be
more realistic.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Obviously, the petitioner will be
responsible for any additional advertising that may be required.
Commissioner Berry.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Whatever it takes.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: The county taxpayer won't pay
for that, I guess.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I don't think so.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The question --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: There's a motion to continue --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I don't think that's fair. They came
up here expecting to get an approval or a denial. We are the ones
that are continuing it, so I don't know if that's fair.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Well, that's fine. I won't support
the motion to continue then and we can deny it. I'm trying to do
them a favor by giving them an opportunity, but I'm not going to
have the taxpayer pay for advertising for their project.
MR. ANDERSON: If you've continued it to a date certain,
there's not going to be any additional advertising required.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Right.
MR. ANDERSON: And I don't know that there was any for this
excavation permit. We just -- you have to send out letters, and
everybody has received notice. If they were here today and
interested in it, they know when it's going to be heard again.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
for one month?
COMMISSIONER BERRY:
enough time to sit down and
better?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:
COMMISSIONER BERRY:
continue it for a month.
We're talking then of continuing it
Is that going to give everybody
talk about this, or is two weeks
A month.
A month, all
That's in my motion.
right. Then we
Page 43
January25,20000
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Can we have that continuation
subject that they come back with an actual answer as opposed to
don't bring it back if you don't have an answer?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Come back with an answer.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: There's a motion and a second.
Further discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion, please state
aye.
Let's take about a seven minute break. When we come back,
we'll go to Item 5-A-3 that we continued earlier.
(Small break was held).
Item #5A3
PROCLAMATION DEDICATING THE COLLIER COUNTY
COURTHOUSE IN THE MEMORY OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING,
JR. - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Welcome back. We'll call back
the Board of County Commissioners' meeting. If you are
conducting business and you need to continue, you're more than
welcome to do so in the hall. Otherwise, we need to have a
meeting in here.
*** The next item we're going to hear had been continued
from earlier this morning or tabled from earlier this morning is --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to remove it from the
table.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I'll second that. I don't know
that it was formally tabled, but we're not going to go through that.
5-A-3, proclamation, Commissioner Mac'Kie, do you want to read
that proclamation?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I do. I'm honored to read this
proclamation, but before I do it, I want to say -- I almost don't
know what to say. I can't imagine that we are here and that this
had to be continued and that this requires any discussion,
because this is such a good idea. I appreciate, Commissioner
Page 44
January25,20000
Constantine, you bringing it up. I'm sorry that it got so confused
with the newspaper report, but -- well, let me read it.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Before you read it, could we have
somebody update us on what the judiciary said?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We will. Let's -- if you don't
mind, I'm going to operate today's meeting, and we're going to
hear the proclamation, and we'll hear from Judge Blackwell, who
is taking time out of his court schedule to be with us this morning,
but we're going to do this in some semblance of order.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The proclamation reads as follow:
Whereas, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is an American hero who
dedicated his life's work to the pursuit of equality, justice and
freedom; and,
Whereas, Dr. King's efforts touched millions of people and
empowered them to fight discrimination, racism and prejudice in
the United States; and,
Whereas, Dr. King's dream is a reminder that the fight is
never won until equality is achieved for all mankind; and,
Whereas, Collier County recognizes there should be a symbol
in the community that serves as a daily reminder of Dr. King's
dream; and,
Whereas, no facility in the community of Collier County
symbolizes Dr. King's dream for equality and justice more than the
Collier County Courthouse; and,
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners would like to
recognize the contributions of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. by
naming the Collier County Courthouse in his honor; and,
Whereas, the Collier County branch of the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People wholly
supports the naming of the courthouse in honor of Dr. King.
Now therefore, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida wishes to recognize the many contributions of Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr. to Collier County and its citizens by naming
the current Collier County Courthouse at the Collier County
Government Center The Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Building.
Done and ordered this 25th day of January, 2000. Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Timothy J.
Page 45
Janua~ 25,20000
Constantine, Chairman.
I'm going to go ahead and move acceptance of the
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Let's hear from Jerome Van
Hook with the NAACP and then we'll hear from Judge Blackwell.
MR. VAN HOOK: Thank you, Mr. Constantine.
Today I am quite flabbergasted. I was --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Just for the record, you are?
MR. VAN HOOK: I am Jerome Van Hook, the president of the
NAACP.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. VAN HOOK: But again, as I was saying, I was quite
flabbergasted today when I heard the shocking news of the
proclamation being withdrawn from the agenda.
When Ms. Mac'Kie read the proclamation, it pretty much said
everything that I would stand up in front of you-all and express.
You're talking about a gentleman who stood for the equality and
justice of all, and today we are having concerns by some
individuals as to why we do not want to name the courthouse in
the name of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King.
Before today, there had not been any discussion about
renaming the courthouse. The courthouse has been here for eight
to ten years. Now we decide that it is appropriate to honor a
great man who stood for, again, an equality of all, and while doing
this, now we have concerns from some other individuals.
I am just curious as to why someone, after it had already
been on the agenda and agreed on by some of our commissioners,
why this would be a problem and what their reasoning would be
for not naming the courthouse the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther
King, and with that, I would just wait and hear out the reasonings,
and then from that point, if I may, make a further comment as to
the reasoning. I'm just -- right now I am totally flabbergasted and
would love to hear the reasoning as to why someone or a group or
anyone would not want to honor a man as such who stood, again,
for the justice and the equality of everyone in this room.
Thank you.
Page 46
Janua~ 25,20000
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
Judge Blackwell, we appreciate you taking time out today. I
understand you'd like to share some thoughts with us on this.
JUDGE BLACKWELL: Thank you for the opportunity to come
over and speak to you. My name is William Blackwell. I'm the
chief circuit judge in the twentieth circuit.
Let me say up front, I'm not here to oppose honoring Martin
Luther King. I don't wish to demean in any way any of his
contributions to the justice of this country or the cause of his
people and other people.
My problem with doing this is the way it's being done. I first
heard about this proposal yesterday. I made a series of calls to
the county commission to suggest that you give some more time
so that we could ask the other judges, for example, they might
like a say. I've talked to one of the others. I have not had a
chance to talk to any of the remaining judges. I don't know that
any of them knew about it.
When I called over here yesterday afternoon, I was told that
my request would go through. I managed to talk to Commissioner
Berry very briefly and gave her the same thoughts I'm now telling
you, and later I got a call from Mr. McNees I believe it was telling
me the whole thing was off, and it wouldn't be heard today, and
this morning I get a call saying well, oh, it's not really off. It's on.
So, I'm not sure why it's being done this way.
I have no problem whatever with honoring Dr. Martin Luther
King. I think we ought to name the airport after him, the
Southwest Regional Airport or anything.
If we want to honor this justice building, I would like to
suggest respectfully that you give some thought to naming it after
Harold Smith. Harold Smith was the first circuit judge that this
county ever had. He was a resident here. He served honorably for
years. Even in retirement, he served as a retired senior judge, and
he died some years ago, I believe now it's been somewhere back
about mid or late '80s. He was instrumental, as I understand it, in
the early '60s in picking this very site that we now sit on as a
location for this courthouse and this government center after
Hurricane Donna pretty much destroyed Everglades City and the
Page 47
Januaw 25,20000
old courthouse down there.
There are probably a lot of other people around here that
would like to speak to this issue but don't know about it and will
not have the opportunity if you rush the judgment today.
Now, alarmingly to me, it was suggested to me out in the hall
a few minutes ago in a conversation with one of your members
and an individual that represented the NAACP that I was
somehow being set up as a dupe or a fall to carry the ball for the
opposition. I'm not here at all, as I said earlier, to oppose the
honoring of Martin Luther King in any way, but if you want to
rename the courthouse, I ask that you give people a chance to
speak to the issue. I guess most of you ought to know me well
enough by now to know that I don't serve as a fool or a dupe for
anybody. I value my independence and my integrity as a judge,
and I'm not about to do anything to put that on the line in the way
of risk.
I'll ask simply that you give this issue some time so the
public can comment on it. I ask that you consider my suggestion
that you name the building after Harold Smith, and further, that
you name the airport or get the city to name the airport after
I
Martin Luther King or even the Southwest Regional Airport.
think that would be a larger monument to his accomplishment.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
I understand we have some speakers this morning.
MR. McNEES: You do have. Your first would
Bonaquist, who will be followed by LaVerne Franklin.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Good morning.
be Jim
MR. BONAQUIST: Good morning. I'm Jim Bonaquist. I'm
president of the Collier County Bar Association, and really, I guess
what I would do would be to echo Judge Blackwell's comments. I
learned about this yesterday as well.
The naming of the courthouse dedicated to Martin Luther
King may be a wonderful idea. Perhaps naming it against some --
naming it for some local juris would be a more appropriate idea,
I'm not really sure, but I do know this, I have over 700 members of
the bar association --
Page 48
Janua~ 25,20000
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Are you on their behalf?
MR. BONAQUIST: I'm here on my own behalf, and I think that
bears out the problem that we have. I don't know that any of my
members know about this. We had a board meeting last week.
We didn't know about this. We didn't discuss this. I don't know
what the position of the board or of my membership would be
because we haven't had the opportunity to discuss it.
So, what I would ask is that this issue be tabled or postponed
and, you know, we have the opportunity to come back and present
our position to this body, and that's what I'm asking for today.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. BONAQUIST: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just have to say, I'm a member of
the Collier County Bar Association, and you certainly are not
speaking for me when you say that, and I -- I understand that I'm
aware of, more than the average lawyer in Collier County, of
what's going on at the Collier County commission because I get
the agenda, but the agenda is published in the legal notices. It's
published in the newspaper. It's all over the place. It's on the TV.
How can -- if you were a property owner showing up here saying,
well, the notice was advertised in the TV -- in the paper, but gee, I
didn't really know -- I haven't been able to talk to my neighbors
about this enough to get their feelings about it, we would say
legal notice
we're very sorry, but we've complied with the
requirements, and we'd send you away.
MR. BONAQUIST: That's fine. I understand
telling you that we had a board meeting last week.
that, but I'm
No one was
aware of it. I got a call yesterday afternoon, and I was told it was
off. I didn't call any board members. I didn't call any members of
the general membership to find out what their position was. You
know, I got a call again this morning.
So, all I'm asking for is the opportunity to come back to you
and let you know what our membership's position is.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I wish that you can -- this is just
my philosophical statement. It's a darn shame that you can't be
confident that your membership would enthusiastically endorse
this, because it's such a good idea.
Page 49
Januaw 25,20000
MR. BONAQUIST: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Next speaker.
MR. McNEES: Mrs. Franklin will be followed by Al Moore.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Good morning.
MS. FRANKLIN: Good morning, and thank you for your
consideration.
I was here approximately two weeks ago.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: For the record, your name is?
MS. FRANKLIN: My name is LaVerne Franklin. I'm an
executive member of the NAACP, and I implore you to act on this
today on our behalf.
We were all enthusiastic. The minority community has been
addressed. They are endorsing this 100 percent. I did talk to Mr.
Constantine about this. We are behind this 100 percent. If there
was a miscommunication, it was not on our part.
We are here to ask you to name this courthouse in honor of
Dr. King. We are here in support of that idea. To me now, to wait
for this last moment seems to be a slap in our face, you know, and
we are here -- it's a tough decision, you know. We are here to
support the County in any way that we can.
We came here a couple of weeks ago asking whatever we
could do in support of naming a suitable facility in honor of Dr.
King, and this idea was brought to us, and we accepted it
wholeheartedly, and for now, for people to come at the very last
moment and say they are opposed to it, we have a problem with
that. We don't understand why -- the courthouse has been there
for so many years, and no one ever suggested anything, and now
that it has been brought forth with the wonderful idea and a
tribute to a wonderful individual, why all the controversy? We
don't understand why the controversy? Why not name it in honor
of Dr. King? Are there any valid reasons why it cannot be named
in honor of Dr. King? We have not heard that.
So, we are asking you, imploring you to act and to please
name this courthouse in honor of Dr. King. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Moore will be followed by Rufus Watson.
Page 50
Januaw 25,20000
MR. MOORE: My name is Al Moore, and I'd just like to
crystallize the wonderful proclamation and capitalize the goals
and accomplishments of Dr. King and to say that Dr. King's focus
was to make equality to all races, and I can't think of a better
person or better role model to name a facility after than a person
like that, to have our kids in Collier County to say that that's a role
model, that we aspire to have a facility named after him is a great
thing.
What do we tell our kids if we don't, if we continue to bicker
about this? We go back to our community and tell our kids that
the commission is not going to name it, is not going to name it Dr.
King or that there's a hassle about doing that. The suggestion is
to name another facility after Dr. King. Where does this stop?
Now go to our library. Now we have a contentious issue with
someone else that they don't want to name the library after. The
airport, should we name the airport after Dr. King? The airport is,
as I understand it, it's city property, so that's pushing it into
another area of -- another government area of responsibility, so
that becomes another issue that we have to continue to fight.
Just where does it stop?
As with him and all of the things that he did, there was
always a struggle. His goal was to have equality for everyone,
and I'm saying and I'm asking you to stop the struggle here and
name the facility after Dr. King. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Watson, followed by George Vega.
MR. WATSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commission
members. My name is Rufus Watson. I am the chairman of the
County Black Affairs Advisory Board. I support the proclamation
as read, and as many of my colleagues here from the NAACP has
stated, no greater honor could be bestowed upon Dr. King than
naming this building after him.
A few weeks ago I think I read there were suggestions that
nine -- Road 951 be named after Dr. King. Well, that was passed
over. I think it would be, as LaVerne stated, a slap in the face to
the black community if this particular proclamation was not
Page 51
Januaw 25,20000
approved.
Again, I implore you to pass it.
Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Vega, followed by Klm Long.
MR. VEGA: Good morning. My name is George Vega.
The reason I'm here is not to dishonor Dr. King in any way,
shape or form. In fact, it may be a very good idea to name the
courthouse after him. However, I believe the courthouses are
normally named after a local situation, local -- and there can't be
anything more local, and the reason that I would suggest Harold
Smith is that the moving of the courthouse was an actual function
of when the Everglades City was moved -- the courthouse was
moved itself, the venue of the entire county seat was moved, and
that was one of the main functions that Harold Smith played.
The second thing is that in moving this, you actually before --
this entire county, Collier County was a company owned county
by the Collier Corporation. I mean, it was known like that in
school books, actually. There was no county manager. The
county engineer was a Collier employee. Everybody was a Collier
employee of the corporation. This really was the breaking away
from the Collier Corporation. I don't mean that against the Collier
Corporation either. I mean, it was done in a peaceful manner, but
it was a peaceful revolution, and I don't know if we've ever
actually acknowledged the revolution that we had from going from
a corporate county to a county where the people were --
democracy, actually, and in this situation, Harold Smith was the
main person involved as the county attorney because he bucked a
lot of people, he lost his ]ob before he went to Korea, all kinds of
things that I can go on and on and on. He actually picked this
site, and for 25,000, there was a letter written, and he -- it was the
man that picked the site and wrote us. He had no property
anywhere near here, and no one in his firm did, and I was a
partner, and I worked with him in moving the courthouse. There
were two or three lawsuits involved. He won them all, and I think
that he would be someone that you should consider, and, again,
this is nothing against Martin Luther King, and Harold Smith
certainly would have been the last person to say anything about
Page 52
Janua~ 25,20000
Martin Luther king, and he donated money to NAACP. He donated
money to the Jewish groups, the Catholic groups, everything, and
I'm just suggesting that you should consider Harold also.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Vega.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: George.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: George.
MR. VEGA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just, while you were there,
wanted to say that you can't be a lawyer in this county without
knowing the legend of Judge Smith, and he is a wonderful man
and played a significant role in, as you described, in the
establishment of what we now know as Collier County. I would be
more than happy to work with you on finding an appropriate
county building to name in his honor. I don't think it has to be the
courthouse, and I think that the divisiveness that would result
should we get as far as we have down this road toward naming
the courthouse after Dr. King and then failing to do so, the
divisiveness that would result outweighs the need to name that
particular building after Judge Smith, but I would love to work
with you to honor him in some way, because I would like to help
preserve the legacy that he also brought to this county, but not to
delay in this action, and I just kind of wonder where has the bar
been until now on naming the building?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Probably up until just -- excuse me,
Commissioner Constantine.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Up until just recently, there were no
buildings -- we didn't do the naming of buildings. We did name
some parks, and that was a long time ago with Max Hasse Park.
That was kind of an anomaly at that time. We just didn't do that.
I wasn't on the commission at that time, so it was unusual to
name something.
We did recently -- we renamed this building the Harmon F.
Turner Building, named after, I believe he was the first county
engineer, and also, he had been an employee of the Collier
Corporation as well.
We are all placed in a very difficult situation here this
Page 53
Janua~ 25,20000
morning because, again, the process was not as good as it could
have been, and unless you work in what we do on a day-to-day
basis, you don't always read the newspaper for all the
proclamations, and you would all have to understand that every
week on any given week, we have anywhere from three to five to
six proclamations, and unless you scan the newspaper and are so
interested in Collier County business, you're not going to pick up
on this, but the problem lies with the fact that the process should
have involved the people who happen to be a part of the judiciary.
This is nothing against the NAACP, absolutely nothing, and
for anybody to sit out there and paint the picture that we are
sitting up here and we are disputing trying to name something
appropriately and that we are trying to slap anybody in the face,
you can say that. I mean, anybody can say anything they want to,
but that isn't the truth.
The truth is that the process did not involve the people that
should have been involved as well, and the same thing would be
true if this were reversed. If this were something else and you
were on the other side of it and you would say well, why didn't you
come to us and ask us how we felt about whatever the instance
might be if you were somehow involved in whatever we were
discussing, I will tell you there was a proclamation read back in
the first meeting in January regarding recognizing Dr. Martin
Luther King Day.
That proclamation did not come from the NAACP. It came
because I asked Ms. Filson to contact someone from the NAACP
to see if they wanted a proclamation.
So for anybody to paint the commission up here as saying,
oh, well, they don't want to do this, that's baloney, because if we
hadn't done it that first meeting, you would not have had a
proclamation recognizing Martin Luther King Day. CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Next speaker.
MR. McNEES: Your next speaker is Kim Long, and Mr. Van
Hook had registered.
You have two other speakers who submitted after the item
had begun. I'll leave it to your discretion.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I'll do that. I think you even
Page 54
January25,20000
stated that pretty clearly less than an hour ago.
MS. LONG: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and commissioners.
First of all, I'd like to address --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: For the record, your name is?
MS. LONG: I'm sorry. For the record, my name is Kim Long.
First of all, I'd like to address the -- the comment that
Commissioner Berry just brought up about the proclamation for
Dr. King Day in January. Chuck Mohlke contacted the office, and I
sent a letter as a follow-up to ask for the proclamation. This is
not to say that you didn't do --
COMMISSIONER BERRY: That was after Ms. Filson contacted
Mr. Mohlke, okay. That's how it happened.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Anyway, let's try to stay with the
item at hand today.
MS. LONG: Thank you.
I just would like to thank you for bringing forth the
proclamation, but I'd also like to ask that we please be given full
and rational explanation as to why the naming of a facility in
Collier County to honor Dr. Reverend Martin Luther King would
present a dilemma in 2000, a new millennium?
Dr. King was an honorable and famous American of
international acclaim. His life's philosophy was of non-violent
pursuit, of freedom, justice, civil liberty and rights for everyone.
Why not name the hub of justice in this county for him? Please do
the right thing today and honor this great man once and for all.
Collier County needs to finally admit that the county is
multi-cultural. The diversity among our tax paying and voting
residents needs to be honored and celebrated. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
Commissioner Norris.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, I appreciate all the speakers'
comments today. I don't have any objection to renaming the
building in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King. However, the judiciary
has been kind enough to come over and ask that we wait for a
couple of weeks to do so, and in courtesy, I think we should give
them the couple of weeks because they have not had time to
Page 55
January25,20000
discuss it among themselves, and they are who are affected. It's
their building.
So, I make a motion to table for two weeks.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: And I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Jerome, I'm sorry, you had a
chance to wrap up here.
MR. VAN HOOK: One of the things that I wanted to say after
being able to hear everyone's comments is that as Ms. Berry has
stated, she was speaking of a process. Every time an issue has
come up in the past with regards to the NAACP or things of
concern in the minority community, the word process has always
come up, and in the very end, it was always the minority
community that came up on the end results of the process.
Now, again, the agenda was something that was a public
notice that was put out. I feel that, again, not only being a slap in
the face, why penalize the minority community because the bar
association or other individuals were not able to see the agenda
or make reference to the agenda, but maybe we can also offer
something in addition?
We're continuing the proclamation today in honoring the or
making -- changing the name of the courthouse to the Honorable
Dr. Reverend Martin Luther King, why couldn't we think about
naming the government complex later in the name of the judge? I
mean, that's something that could be looked at, because, again,
we are not trying to be adversaries. We are trying to come here
together. We are trying to work together as one, and everyone
who came up and spoke on this podium did not oppose having the
courthouse named Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King. They just
came up with some other concerns and some other individuals,
which was one name. So why -- why don't we go further and today
complete the proclamation, and then from that point, think about
naming the government complex after the judge? Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you very much.
We have a motion to approve the proclamation motion, and
there is a motion to table the first motion, which we'll call the
question on the motion to table.
Page 56
January25,20000
All those in favor, state aye.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: All those opposed?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Aye.
Motion fails three to two. Commissioner Berry and
Commissioner Norris in the two minority, which takes us back to
the motion to approve the proclamation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: May I make a comment before we
vote on that?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Please do.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because I would so, so like for
that to be -- for there to be a unanimous vote in support of this
proclamation today.
I understand and agree with you even, Commissioner Berry,
about the surprise and the short term on this process. I was
surprised by this proclamation even though anybody would know
that I'd be somebody who would be enthusiastically in favor of it,
but I think that the error, if there was one, in the process here
was in the enthusiasm for what seemed to be an obviously good
idea that nobody could object to. Maybe all of the appropriate
contacts weren't made and the politeness circle wasn't done as
normally as it is, but now we have the proclamation in front of us,
and we have this choice.
We can either -- the last thing I want to do is insult the
judiciary. I'd like to be a part of them someday, for God's sake.
It's the last thing I want to do is insult them, but now I'm faced
with the choice that I either have to say thank you very much, I
understand you weren't contacted as would have been
appropriate, but we either are going to slight the judiciary with an
apology or we're going to slap the minority community, and that
really is, whether we like it or not, the box we're in at this
moment.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: And how did we get in that box,
Commissioner?
Page 57
Janua~ 25,20000
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's a dang shame that we're
there.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: In the sage words of Ken Cuyler,
we are where we are.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, I don't think we are there --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, we are.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: We don't have to be there.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- but the judiciary has asked us for
a two week delay, it's not a slap to anybody, it's a courtesy to
them. I don't see that we're in a box at all.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We can either slap them --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Hold on just a second. That's
not the item right now. There was a motion to continue to table it
for two weeks. That failed, and the item before us is the
proclamation itself.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Just responding to Commissioner
Mac'Kie's comments which were in error.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: And inappropriate.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They were appropriate comments
-- I'm sorry, your position that we have merely been asked to delay
was absolutely on point for the previous motion, but not on point
for this motion.
Now that that has failed, I would ask you please to make this
a unanimous approval for this proclamation.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And I further say, I think Mr. Van
Hook's suggestion really is a great opportunity to make lemonade
out of a lemon here. If the judiciary has taken some offense or
has a preference to honor Mr. Smith, I think, particularly
considering, as Judge Blackwell said, the history in moving this
seat to this location, literally creating this geographic location,
that's an excellent idea to name the entire complex, and that may
be something worth pursuing.
With that, we'll call the question. All those in favor, please
state aye. Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
Page 58
Janua~ 25,20000
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: All those opposed?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion carries three two.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Shall we present
proclamation?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Oh, yeah, Jerry, if you
come up, here's a proclamation here for you.
the
want to
Item #8B1
PRESENTATION OF THE RESULTS OF STAFF AND CONSULTANT
INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE EXTENSION OF PIPER BOULEVARD
EASTERLY TO STRAND BOULEVARD - STAFF TO PURSUE
ACQUISITION OF A MINIMUM 60' RIGHT-OF-WAY THROUGH THE
STRAND'S PLATTED LBE BETWEEN CARLTON LAKES AND THE
STRAND BOULEVARD EXISTING PLATTED RIGHT-OF-WAY
Which moves us on to the public works agenda, 8-B-1,
present the results of staff and consultant investigations into the
extension of Piper Boulevard easterly to Strand Boulevard.
MR. KANT: Good morning, commissioners. Edward Kant,
transportation services director. Hopefully mine is the cough.
At the December 14th, 1999 meeting, staff presented a
recommendation to the board with regard to the extension of
Piper Boulevard. At that meeting, the board directed staff in
response to a public member's comments to investigate the
methodology by which we might extend Piper Boulevard to Strand
Boulevard to make an intersection on Strand Boulevard.
In the executive summary, we have shown that there are
three basic steps to achieving that goal, one of which would be to
pursue the acquisition of a 60 foot right-of-way, either in fee or as
an easement along the Carlton Lakes frontage consistent with the
PUD zoning documents. However, there may be eminent domain
issues, depending on how the plat and zoning documentation
language is interpreted.
The second step would be -- or another step would be to
Page 59
Januaw 25,20000
direct staff to pursue acquisition of a minimum -- there's an error
in that executive summary. It says 60 foot. It should say 20 foot
right-of-way through the platted Carlton Lakes/Strand Boulevard
landscape buffer easement. Based on the placement of the entry
signs and placement of the landscape buffer easement, we
believe that an eminent domain action may be necessary.
And finally, one of the issues that needs to be examined is a
performance of an engineering study of the proposed intersection
of Piper Boulevard and Strand Boulevard. The study would be
necessary to determine how to handle the traffic and turning
movements between Piper Boulevard and Strand Boulevard. The
location is not conducive to an intersection that will meet
contemporary engineering standards.
Neither the staff nor the County's consultant's findings
indicate a concurrency-driven need for the extension of Piper
Boulevard, and based on the foregoing review and investigation,
staff is continuing to recommend that any connection between
Piper Boulevard and Strand Boulevard, which will be dictated by
the Tract B in Carlton Lakes, should be a pedestrian/bicyclist
pathway and not used for motorized vehicles.
We are concerned that a connection located immediately
north of the Cocohatchee Canal will only exacerbate an already
congested intersection at Strand and Immokalee Road. We have
similar intersections to the west, and these intersections are
functioning only as a consequence of relatively Iow volumes of
traffic and Iow speeds.
Based on the need for potential eminent domain, there was a
comment made that the County's eminent domain power might be
used to wrest an easement or fee interest in the Tract D of the
Strand. Staff is of the opinion that eminent domain action may
not prevail given that our own studies indicate that such a
connection is not necessary and that alternate access by an
available existing arterial is already available.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I ask a question on that
point?
MR. KANT: Based on these findings --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Ed.
Page 60
Janua~ 25,20000
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I ask you a question on that
point about not necessary, because that's sort of the crux of the
issue here? Nobody disagrees, or I don't think, or maybe I should
ask, does staff agree that it would be a really good idea to have
the connection, not necessary from a traffic engineering
standpoint as different from it would be good or do you guys think
it's a bad idea?
MR. KANT: I find it difficult to separate out the traffic
engineering from the idea of good or bad, frankly.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's how engineers think.
MR. KANT: Unfortunately, I am one.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, you know, then I guess I'm
going to have to use plain old common sense, thank God I only
have a law degree and not engineering, but the -- who could argue
that it would have been a really good idea to have connected it for
convenience sake, for just common sense.
My question, I guess at this point, is maybe for Mr. Weigel,
and that is, is it too late because it's only a good idea and not
something that traffic engineering studies say is required? Can
we win an eminent domain action for what's a logical good idea or
have we lost this one already?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And I want to tag on that,
Counselor, if it's in a PUD and we have a right, why did the right
go away because somebody encroached on our right and put up a
barrier, and I cannot understand why we can't win?
MR. KANT: I can address that, Commissioner, after Mr.
Weigel addresses the other question, if you'd like.
MR. WEIGEL: I was kind of hoping he'd go first, but in any
event, if the right is there and has merely had a physical
impediment put in place over time, ultimately, those kinds of
factual distinctions would be important in a contest in a court of
law, but there are underlying rights that were approved by the
board and recognized by the parties and were of record, and these
do not just go away by the unilateral acts of one person, even
though some time has passed. Obviously, it's something of
contention that could be resolved in a court of law.
The question of whether it's merely a good idea as opposed
Page 61
Janua~ 25,20000
to required by concurrency or growth management aspects isn't
the question, I think, before us at this point in time. The board
makes its decisions for particular land use and road development
based upon public health, safety and welfare issues and
exercising its police powers, and concurrency and growth are a
factor but are not necessarily the sole factors in those kinds of
cases.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, it's not -- it's not a slam dunk
that we couldn't win this in court. We might because I see that
it's clearly in the health, safety and welfare interest of the public
to have that vehicular access, and I want to see us pursue it.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you for making that part
of the record, the health, safety and welfare part.
Mr. Kant, anything else you want to add on that?
MR. KANT: I have put on the visualizer two sketches of the
same area. I've highlighted in yellow the 60 foot -- I'm searching
for a word because it's not a roadway easement. It is platted as a
community identification tract, and in that community
identification tract, the Carlton Lakes developer has been given
the right to provide landscaping and whatever else he feels is
appropriate, signage, et cetera.
Then on the right side of each of those sketches, I've also
highlighted the Strand's landscape buffer easement, which is the
seeming impediment even if we were to require the 60 foot as a
right-of-way.
On the left sketch, I've also shown the existing Piper
Boulevard connection to Livingston Road and what we are going
to be proposing as part of a relocation of that in order to make
that intersection continue to function. We do not have that luxury
nor that opportunity at the Strand Boulevard intersection, and if
we had that at Lakeland Boulevard -- I'm sorry, not Lakeland,
Euclid Avenue and at Palm River Boulevard and at Cypress Way
West, we would try to do the same thing, to get some separation
in there. That's what is concerning us from a traffic engineering
point of view, which also has public health, safety and welfare
implications, and that, as your engineering professional, is what I
have to look to.
Page 62
Janua~ 25,20000
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I don't know how familiar all of you
are with this particular area up in there, but when you come down
Piper, which, by the way, I hope we can resurface Piper out there.
It's --
MR. KANT: That's in the works, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: -- worse than a roller coaster ride at
this point. I drive it frequently, but at any rate, when you
approach the Strand -- or not the Strand, the Livingston Road
section, you come up. You make kind of a little sharp little S, and
you're up to that roadway. You're right immediately at the bridge,
okay. So what Ed has shown here, we would have to pull off, and
where Mediterra, their office building is located, would we have to
go behind that currently to come up and approach that?
MR. KANT: That office, as you call it, that sales center will
be relocated. That's a temporary issue, but we are going to try to
get -- the County owns the rest of that land in there, and we're
going to try to get that relocated. I don't know if we'll be able to
do it under the two lane scenario, but we definitely want to do it
under the four lane.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Now, help me, Ed, here. When you
go -- if you were to cross Livingston Road at that point, and right
now, this is where Carlton Lakes has their sales trailers or they
did, I guess maybe they are in the process of moving them, how
would you connect back up again to Piper?.
MR. KANT: Where the Carlton Lakes entrance is, Piper would
be moved more north to make a four way at that point.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: So, you would come up, and then
you would have to swing back down again --
MR. KANT: This -- where I'm pointing to is the existing Piper
connection.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: That's right.
MR. KANT: We are proposing to try to get it moved north so
that we get a four way here, which will be about seven or 800 feet
north of the canal.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Okay. So now, though, you're going
to have to come back down, and where is the shopping center?.
They are putting a shopping center in here.
Page 63
January25,20000
MR. KANT: That's this parcel here.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Yes.
MR. KANT: This piece is what is the 60 feet which I've
highlighted over here. That's the 60 feet that is platted as the
community identification tract, which has been identified by some
in, I think, honest error, as the roadway. It's not platted that way,
and I've added that to your agenda packet.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Okay. Well, this -- talking to some
of the residents, and I brought this up with them back when I first
came on the commission, that wouldn't it be nice to connect up
Piper and run down to the Strand, and yes, it would. However,
when South Florida Water Management District came in and
dredged the canal, that also created some more problems.
Now what you're going to have to do -- and we may win in
court. Okay, we could probably, if it's in the PUD, maybe we can
win in court, but you're going to go in there, and you're going to
take out a berm that runs along condos that are in back of -- or
say in front, in back, however you want to look at it, of Carlton
Lakes, and I mean they are right there; am I correct, Ed? MR. KANT: That's correct, Commissioner.
I have another copy of a plat of Carlton Lakes. They have an
entrance road that comes in here. There's also a driveway that
comes right along the edge of this plat, and there's a roadway in
there, so you would wind up putting a roadway next to a roadway
and all those condos -- villas, condos, whatever they are, would be
facing that double roadway.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Right, and then you do end up with
a problem when you get up to the Strand --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: A big problem.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: -- of trying to access and get up on
that roadway, because you are having traffic that is coming out
and you would have to tear up their median up there, which that
can be done, I guess, to go ahead and try to access the roadway
to get in there.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: So, as great as this is
conceptually, practically it's --
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Practically it doesn't make a lot of
Page 64
January25,20000
sense. Conceptually, yes, a long time ago, this would have been,
perhaps, a wonderful idea to have interconnected a group of
communities along the way, you know, and had them all hook up.
However, one of the things that has helped is the fact that at
the Carlton Lakes PUD where they have classified that -- in fact,
they were in here not along ago when they talked about
Albertson's grocery store. I believe that's --
MR. KANT: Those plans are in for final review now, yes,
ma'am.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Okay. That was put in. That would
be beneficial to the folks that are in the Willoughby Acre/Palm
River area. If they didn't want to go out onto Immokalee Road,
they could access that particular area by even -- I mean, we're
going to have to do something with that little access point there
anyway, am I correct, Ed?
MR. KANT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: So, that's going to have to happen.
That's going to be there. So they will have access to get over to a
grocery store and perhaps whatever else they choose to put into
that, but the folks would like, and I believe that's proposed in the
recommendation, to have at a minimum a bike path that would run
along Carlton Lakes, and there is room to do that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Norris.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, I'm looking at the staff's
findings, and it says that it's not necessary, and it says further
that it would not be recommended by staff under any
circumstances, but just imagine for a moment, if you would, if you
were driving eastbound on this proposed Piper, not a roadway,
and you get to the Strand, and you look to see if traffic is coming,
all you're going to see is a bridge. Your view is going to be
completely blocked by the bridge abutment there. There's -- I
mean, it's totally not functional.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We have no speakers on this.
Any other questions for our staff?
What is the pleasure of the board?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I'm going to, at least,
support the bike/walking pathway with deep concerns being all of
Page 65
January25,20000
this is bad design in an area where we had an opportunity where
we could have created a positive design. I'm going to tell you I
think we got nibbled to death by ducks in here, by people making
promises or doing things and constructing things piecemeal, and I
hope we don't do that again, Mr. Kant, and I'm not blaming you, it
could have been prior to your time, but we should learn from this,
and I'm still concerned that anytime we have something in a PUD
that gives a right, and maybe we slept on our rights, and I don't
know how much of that is out here.
What I want to draw a line here this morning that says, I want
to get the best that we can out of this, and there may be some
practicalities of why I can't have the road, but at least we can
have a bike and walkway path.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: That is certainly where I'm coming
from.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I'll agree if that's all we can
do, but the other little comment I have to make on the record is
the one that I made before when we discussed this, and that is I
went back and pulled the transcript of the meeting where we
discussed this PUD to see where was staff in waving the flag to us
saying, now, you do understand that you're giving away something
here. It wasn't there, and maybe they think we are smarter than
we are, but we are not, because we didn't know. I can tell you, I
wouldn't have voted for it. I would not have voted to give that
away, and I expect that to be something that staff points out to
us. From a good design, you're the professionals. We need that
professional recommendation from you when we're about to do
something that gives away a right that the County has, as Jim
said, that got nibbled away.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Carter, were your
comments in the form of a motion or if not, would you care to put
them in a form of a motion?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes, I will move that we go with
item number two that would direct staff to pursue an acquisition
of a minimum of a 20 foot right-of-way to the Strand's planned LBA
(sic) between Carlton Lakes and Strand Boulevard, the existing
plan right-of-way and based on that we can accomplish that
Page 66
January25,20000
objective.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I'll second that, because this will
also benefit the Carlton Lakes as well, for those people to be able
to even access, have better access to the Strand, because even
though they back up to the Strand, they really can't get there.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Isn't that amazing?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Further discussion?
Seeing none, objections?
Seeing none, motion carries five oh.
MR. KANT: Thank you, commissioners.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: One other point, you did mention
that on Piper Boulevard, there will be a way for people to come
out of Willoughby Acres and go up and get in in the future, is that
part of the design that I hear?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Yeah, I believe that was --
MR. KANT: That's correct, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Yes, which they can -- they can
access that roadway now, Commissioner Carter, but they're going
to improve that so it moves it a little bit further away from the
bridge, because right now, when you come out of there, you're
right on the bridge.
Item #8B2
MEDIAN LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION AGREEMENT WITH 951
LAND HOLDINGS JOINT VENTURE - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We are on Item 8-B-2.
Commissioner Norris.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: A motion and a second. Any
discussion?
MR. FINN: If I may, Edward Finn, public works administrator.
For the record, there are some staff review requirements
attached to this agreement. There is an amendment to those. On
Page 6 of the review requirements, there is a controller specified
Page 67
January25,20000
as a Motorolla Scorpio V-2.
requirement to design and
upgradeable to said controller.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
your motion includes that?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I was aware
incorporated that into my motion.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
The second the same?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes.
That is to be changed to a
construct the system to be
Commissioner Norris, I assume
of that fact, and I
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We have a motion and a second.
Any public speakers on this item?
MR. McNEES: No, Mr. Chairman. We did want to get on the
record that in our desire to merge bureaucratic time with
business time, we pushed this thing forward a little bit, and we
want the petitioner, if he's here, to acknowledge on the record
that some design requirements that are not actually yet in writing
be considered a part of this
Is anybody representing the
Come up to the podium and
will be acknowledged and will
process. If there's not --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
petitioner here?
MR. PERCY: Yes, Your Honor.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
identify yourself and hopefully just a very, very short agreement
on the record.
MR. PERCY: Yes, we will --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: You are?
MR. PERCY: My name is Joseph Percy.
I'm here for the
petitioner, and we will look at those design requirements.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thanks.
MR. PERCY: You bet.
MR. McNEES: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We have a motion and a second.
Any further discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion, state aye.
Anybody opposed?
Motion carries five oh.
Page 68
Janua~ 25,20000
Item #8B3
RESOLUTION 2000-29, AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE A LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR STATE ROAD
951 LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
discussion?
Any public speakers?
Any objection?
Next item is 8-B-3.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Second it.
A motion and a second.
Seeing none, motion carries five oh.
Any
Item #8B5
PETITION TM-99-01 FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
FOR DONNA STREET IN THE COCONUT CREEK ESTATES
NEIGHBORHOOD - APPROVED
That takes us to 8-B-5, Petition TM-99-01, neighborhood
traffic management for Donna Street in the Coconut Creek
Estates neighborhood. Good morning.
MR. MORRIS: Good morning, commissioners. For the record,
my name is Gerald Morris. I'm the project manager for the
neighborhood traffic program for Collier County.
I'm submitting Petition TM-99-01 for traffic management for
Donna Street and Coconut Creek, its biggest neighborhood. Over
the course of time, staff has recommended developments -- and
developed two options to address the traffic speed and
cut-through concerns in this neighborhood.
Page 69
January25,20000
The first was a proposed diverter at Donna and Gail, and this
is the proposal that staff recommended. As you can see by the
blue line, it will show how the traffic would alternate after such a
device was installed, eliminating a great deal of cut-through
traffic and reducing the volume considerably through the
neighborhood.
The second -- after additional meetings, the neighborhood
approved -- reached a consensus on a closure at North Road, and
you can see by the color charts what the traffic pattern should
evolve from out of that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Just in the for what it's worth
category, the first one said -- the first map you had up, which we
do not need to see again, but was called on your map a diverter,
yet it was a complete closure and you couldn't get north-south.
This one, for some reason, is called a closure, and it actually
diverts. I mean, you can still get north-south. It just
inconveniences you by a couple of minutes.
MR. MORRIS: The original map is a diverter as opposed to a
closure, correct.
What -- the consensus that came out of the neighborhood and
staff supports following the second meeting was after the closure
was installed, we would monitor for four to six months to see
what the results of that closure would bring, and at that time, we
would have a better handle on how to apply a strategy that would
be a permanent issue.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: This would be a test facility for
four to six months you're saying? MR. MORRIS= Correct.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Correct.
There were originally some concerns too from some of our
emergency medical vehicles, and we have bridged that gap as
well. We're going to have a break-away type facility so that if you
have fire or ambulance or whoever needs to get through there,
they can. I spoke with the sheriff last week on that as well, and
they're fine with that, and actually, Gerald has done some
engineering. If we, six months from now, find, great, this is
Page 70
Janua~ 25,20000
perfect, this works, he's done some design in Vancouver, I think,
where they had a more permanent feature that emergency
vehicles can still get over, but -- Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I want to support this, but I was,
again, concerned about the EMS and the sheriff.
What do we have from them? Do we have some new
information or something -- or could somebody make a record that
they support the --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I'll make a record. I've spoken
with all three of them --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You have?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: -- and as long as we have that
break-away feature, they are fine with that. They were concerned
here -- the idea here, obviously, you can still get from Radio to
Davis, it's less convenient. So, if you happen to live in the
neighborhood, you can still get out either north or south, but if
you're using this as a cut-through, it may take you an extra 90
seconds or two minutes, you're less likely to use it as a
cut-through.
The emergency vehicles wanted to make sure they didn't add
a couple minutes on their response time, and it appears that
we've taken care of that problem, and as long as we've taken care
of that, they're happy with it.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: It's only a few blocks from Airport
Road, and if you're going to have to wander around through
somebody's neighborhood, you'd be much better off just using the
main highway.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We have some speakers on this?
MR. McNEES: You do have. Your first would be Jody Travis
followed by Diane Gamble.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And if we could just have
whoever will be second come up to the on-deck circle so we can
keep moving fairly rapidly. Good morning.
MS. TRAVIS: Good morning. My name is Jody Travis, and I
happen to live on the corner of North and Donna, so this is a very
Page 71
January25,20000
important thing. I have actually seen cars come to the stop sign,
a big orange bus sitting there, they go ahead and take their left.
The sign is out. They're dropping off kids. They don't even stop.
Because it gives that country road feature, people feel it's all right
to just whip through, cut through and really do whatever they feel.
We have had some support from the police, which is nice. I
have noticed if they are sitting there, people slow down, but, of
course, if they are not there, they go ahead and continue on their
way.
I thank you for looking at this issue. It's -- with a child
getting hit, a man getting hit, the amount of cars that -- yesterday
three cars, I heard them coming, screeching. What they were
doing, I'm not sure. They must have been kids, but at 11:30 in the
morning, they should have been in school. They screeched to a
halt at the corner of Donna and North, turned the corner and
stopped, all three of them, stopped and peeled out one at a time.
That's the kind of traffic we are getting, and I don't think it's our
neighborhood people that are doing that.
So, thank you for seeing this.
COMMISSIONER CONSTANTINE: Thanks.
MR. McNEES: Diane Gamble will be followed by Ted Travis.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: If I could switch the order to have
him heard first.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Sure.
MR. BEAVER: Good morning, commissioners. My name is
Tom Beaver. I'm a resident of Coconut Creek Estates as well as
chairman of the traffic committee.
I would -- I originally was going to go through a long dog and
pony show to let you know what's going on in the neighborhood. I
think you-all are very well aware that we have an overrun of
traffic. These roads are old, narrow and are now experiencing
over 3,500 cars a day through there.
Commissioner Hancock -- or I'm sorry, Constantine has been
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's back.
MR. BEAVER: He's back. It's him, has been very kind to help
us in the neighborhood and has really spearheaded the effort with
Page 72
January25,20000
the traffic department and I think has ironed out all the little
problems involved with this traffic diverter. The diverter itself will
create a roundabout for traffic and hopefully discourage further
traffic coming through the neighborhood.
I'd just like to report to you that the neighborhood is 100
percent behind this issue. We also have letters from Flamingo
Estates which is also an affected neighborhood, and they are also
behind this issue 100 percent.
So, we would like to, at this point, ask you to vote in favor of
this proclamation. Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Travis followed by Debra Cully.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Travis will not be here.
MR. McNEES: Debra Cully and then --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Actually, did we -- we can't
shuffle the deck too far.
MS. GAMBLE: For the record, my name is Diane Gamble, and
I appreciate the commissioners' attention this morning.
I'm here to speak on behalf and support of the Donna Street
petition. The issue here is not one of convenience, although some
that may oppose this will oppose it on the basis that it is
inconvenient for them in traveling through the neighborhood.
However, convenience, if that were the issue, I would have a
justified reason to oppose it. I work here. I work in this building.
I use the Donna Street route every day when I go to and from
work. However, convenience can't be put above the greater good
of the safety of our children. I do not have children. However, in
my neighborhood within four houses of my home are 11 children,
all of them middle school age or younger except for one. This is
an area which you well know, I'm sure, that has no bike path.
There are no sidewalks, substandard roads, documented increase
in traffic and an expected increase in traffic with the completion
of the light that's going up at the intersection of Radio Road and
Donna.
As an aside, I also coach and volunteer at East Naples Middle
School for basketball. I have one of 13 teams that are at East
Naples Middle School, and on my team alone, there are three
Page 73
January25,20000
children, three boys that must use Donna to go to and from
practice. This is not a school function. It's an after school
function. Buses are not provided, and many of them utilize
bicycles to attend their practices, and this occurs several times a
week.
When we say that -- when we talk about child safety, this is
not an abstract. As you are aware, a child was hit on Donna,
Nolan -- Ryan Nolan, not Nolan Ryan, was hit two weeks ago. He
was an East Naples Middle School student riding his bicycle
home, utilizing Donna.
I volunteer at East Naples Middle School, and I won't belabor
the point, but I volunteer because I believe that the children are
our future, and I ask you, our commissioners, that you'll please
help protect our future. Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Debra Cully will be followed by Doreen Vachon.
MS. CULLY: My name is Debra Cully. I'm an 18 year resident
of Coconut Creek Estates.
Some little picture portfolios are being handed to you so that
you can see the flavor of the neighborhood, and I will speak very
briefly on them in just a moment.
I come before you this morning as one of the representatives
of our community to beg you for your help. Our community,
platted in the early 1950s, is one of Naples' oldest and most
unique neighborhoods. Over half of its residents have been there
15 to 30 years. We now find ourselves in a crisis.
Since June, our neighborhood has endured thousands of cars
a day. Traffic statistics say 3,500 just done in October.
This community has substandard, narrow, curvy, blacktopped
roads bordered by deep drainage ditches. We have no sidewalks,
no speed bumps, no streetlights and nowhere to go when forced
off the road by a motor vehicle.
We are within three blocks to East Naples Middle School, and
our children can't even walk there because of the traffic, so that
Collier County has given them a bus to provide transportation
because they acknowledged the road is too dangerous, and for
three blocks, they need to travel in a bus.
Page 74
January25,20000
This problem is compounded by two great facts. Fact one,
we are now the only housing development on Radio Road that
traffic can cut through to get to Davis Boulevard. All other
communities are either gated or secured. Fact number two, the
expansion of Livingston Road will literally pour anywhere from
10,000 to 20,000 cars our way within the next year.
Since June, our community has diligently sought to find
viable, workable solutions to the traffic problems. Dozens of
meetings were set up, traffic counts taken, letters written, phone
calls made. We went through all the proper channels. We've
jumped through all the hoops. We've done everything that has
been asked of us, and before you is a recommended trial solution
to the problem. It is called a traffic diverter. It is not a road
closure as some would complain. It closes no road. It does not
prevent access into this community. It does, however, force
traffic to reroute to the exterior main road, not the interior.
This diverter does not create an elite neighborhood closed to
the public. In fact, it opens up our neighborhood to people who
still want to enjoy biking or jogging or walking their dogs in a safe
and beautiful environment.
Commissioners, there's nothing wrong with forcing traffic to
use the main roads. That's what they were designed for. That's
what we spent million of dollars on road expansions for. If people
want to save a few minute's time, instead of cutting through
neighborhoods, leave earlier. Our own community will be forced
to abide by this diverter also, a far bigger inconvenience to us
than to someone who wants to cut through.
There will never be a solution that pleases 100 percent of the
people, even though I know my co-neighbors said 100, I know
there are a couple of neighbors who are not in favor of this, but
this road diverter will cause many to rant and rave and threaten
and curse. You will always find someone willing to complain.
However, complainers rarely come up with viable solutions. They
care more about their personal agendas, and this traffic diverter
is temporary. It is being tried and tested in the hopes of being an
inexpensive but effective means of control.
With the knockdown barriers as recommended and advised
Page 75
January25,20000
by Mr. Constantine and traffic transportation, emergency medical,
fire and sheriff all have accessibility into this community without
jeopardizing these services.
The pictures that I presented to you are only a thumbnail
sketch of the roads in our community. It is a beautiful place, an
old place worth preserving. I have witnessed your braveness in
standing against the tide of opposition before to do what was
right for a community. Many condemned your actions; I do not. I
find them not only praiseworthy but morally right, and I ask you to
do the same for us in enacting this temporary traffic diverter at
Donna and North. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you very much.
MR. McNEES: Ms. Vachon followed by Ronald Bell.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Yeah, anybody that says things
that nice, we'll give you another five minutes, Debra, don't worry.
MS. VACHON: I have some pictures that I've asked to have
put on the overhead screen, and -- I don't know if you can see
them that well, but some of them are cars going over the line.
Some of them are within a, probably -- I don't know how many
yards it is, but less than a two block -- it's actually a one block
radius, but probably less than a two block radius.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Is that O.J. Simpson in the lower
right hand one?
MS. VACHON: I don't know.
But we've got cars that are passing themselves. The boy
that got hit by the car two weeks ago, the lady -- it was a solid
yellow line. She went around him on a no pass zone. We have
cars that are traveling at 45 miles an hour. The deputies can
make their quota in like 50 minutes any day of the week they
want to stop, and we've offered our driveways to them. They
know it, and the stop signs, the roads are not lining up at the
corner intersection of Gail and Donna. It's been -- the land was
given to the County years ago to realign that road. We've never --
they've never done it.
We've -- we've had East Naples Middle School open since
1968. I've been petitioning for sidewalks in the neighborhood for
a good 10 to 12 years. I did get some results, and we did get
Page 76
Janua~ 25,20000
Cardinal Street done. One of the pictures up there is of the corner
of Cardinal Street where a car took off the drainage ditch cement
wall, and we were expecting children to walk around this. We
have put up a sign, it's a warning sign, it says pathways end here
at the end of the sidewalk. It's like, kid, read the sign, enter at
your own risk, and we are a belt of armor.
I mean, I know you're busing the kids, and I know time -- and
progress takes time, but we've got Livingston coming, a new light
coming and school and neighborhood creates children and a
magnet, and we are in a bad situation. We have a thousand cars --
a thousand cars a day on a road is considered high risk by Collier
County transportation. We are almost at 4,000. That means we
are at the Richter scale of four times the legal limit of what; you
know.
I don't let my kids walk on the streets, and I have seen
women that are taking their children to go to HRS cut through our
neighborhood instead of being on 41, holding their kids' hands and
a bottle of milk to walk across there, and I'm like -- I stop my car
and put them in my car and say, let me give you a ride, and I don't
pick up hitchhikers, but there's going to be some more deaths.
Just during the traffic meetings we had, since we've been
meeting, we've had two people hit. No one killed yet, and it's
going to happen, and I really am feeling for the kids. They feel
like they don't have a voice.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
THE COURT REPORTER: I need her name.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Doreen Vachon.
MR. McNEES: Ronald Bell followed by Linda Heims.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: How many more do we have
after that?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Do they want to talk us out of it?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: There might be a couple. I don't
think so.
Mr. Bell.
MR. BELL: Good morning. My name is Ronald Bell, and I
want to thank Commissioner Constantine for his work on this
project and also for his courtesy of sending letters to the affected
Page 77
Januaw 25,20000
areas so that the residents would be notified of the petition and
have an opportunity to appear today.
I live in Flamingo Estates and due to an automobile accident,
I've had the opportunity to do much more walking in the last year
than I have ever done before. I will tell you that in my opinion, the
walkways and roadways of Collier County are insufficient to
accommodate or to be friendly to walkers or bikers. There is a
documented lack of courtesy between drivers, and that lack of
courtesy is compounded when you consider their attitude toward
walkers and bikers, and there's perhaps no better example of that
than through the subdivision of Coconut Creek.
I walk there frequently, and I am very careful to walk
watching the eyes or faces of the individuals in the cars because I
can generally tell, by whether they are looking at me or not,
whether they intend to run over me or not, and I have identified
certain groups that if I see them coming or certain type of cars, I
move out of the road and into the grass and wait for them to pass.
It is a dangerous situation. It's a situation that should be
monitored closely by the County, and I would suggest that in your
road proposals, that you look at the possibility of adding bike
paths as part of the roadways, because the drivers do not pay
attention to people who are on the sidewalk, whether they are
walking or riding a bike, but they do pay attention to bikers who
are in a designated bike area which is adjacent to and a part of
the roadway because they are looking in that direction and they
see the bikers, where the bikers on the sidewalk, generally the
driver drives through the stop sign area and either blocks the area
or endangers the biker.
So, I would suggest as you consider improvements to the
roads and as you consider construction of new roads, that you
take into consideration bike pathways as part of the asphalt
paved area. Whoever conceived that bikers should be driving or
riding on concrete sidewalks, it's better than being in the
roadway, but it is not sufficient because it presents, actually, a
safety hazard to the biker.
I would like to also comment on the proposed diverter. I
think it's an excellent opportunity to try an alternative to closures.
Page 78
January25,20000
I would also like to suggest that -- I do not believe it's going to be
sufficient, because if you look and watch the automobiles that are
turning off of Davis Boulevard to go into the areas that we are
speaking of, they normally are trying to avoid the intersections of
Davis and Airport and Radio Road and Airport. With the diverter at
the south end of Donna, I do believe those automobiles are going
to continue to go north through Flamingo Estates on Cardinal and
through Coconut Circle on Coconut and go to the west along
North Road and either access then Airport Road at North Road
and Airport or they will make the right-hand turn on Gail and go
into the balance of the subdivision and access -- I keep forgetting
things since the car wreck, and I just don't remember things I
used to know-- access --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: A senior moment.
MR. BELL: -- Radio Road, Radio Road.
So, I think you're going to take some of the traffic out of the
area, but I think you're going to see that you're going to have the
continued traffic along Cardinal and along Coconut.
Perhaps the alternative is going to be either diverters at the
intersection of Cardinal and North Road and a diverter at the
intersection of Coconut and North Road or the closure of North
Road at the intersection of Airport Road, and I think -- I don't think
you can re-educate the number of people who are attempting to
avoid the major intersections, that they are going to find this
other alternative route, which is going to allow them to continue
through the subdivisions that you're concerned about here today.
So, again, I'm in favor of the diverter. I would like you to
consider additional measures.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Linda Heims. We had one other speaker
registered, Janice Elliott, who indicated she probably would not
want to speak but --
MS. ELLIOTT: I waive now.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: She's waiving.
MS. HELMS: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name
is Linda Heims, and I live at the southwest corner of Gail and
Page 79
January25,20000
Donna. My house faces Gail, and I'm right at -- my property abuts
on Donna, and I'm very nervous, so.
My husband and I built our house out there in 1973. Airport
Road was a dirt road when we moved in, so it's really grown up
around us. Our area is very unique, and we have not been coming
to the Board of County Commissioners saying we want new roads,
we want gutters, we want streetlights. We've sat there and been
quiet, and it was a mistake because now we've been dumped on.
I don't think anybody in the world meant to do it. I just think it
was one of these things that happens sometimes, so here we are.
None of us want to be here, and I'm sure you don't want to
hear us, so I'm going to shut up unless you-all have any questions,
but we just beg to have some help out there because we really
need it.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Norris.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Second it.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: A motion and a second. Any
further discussion?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes. I'm going to support the
motion, but I have to say that I do it, frankly, out of the sense of
guilt because this is not a good traffic -- traffic planning -- it's not
a good traffic plan, but what we've done is we created a problem
by virtue of what I have come to feel was one of the mistakes I've
made in voting on this board, and that was the closure of the road
in Foxfire.
They're going to be mad enough at me for saying it.
I think it was a mistake --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I'm just mad that it's a two
minute explanation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's all right, two minutes. It
was a mistake. It was an arrogant mistake on my part, I can only
speak for myself, because what I did, I've learned two things from
it, and one is that I ignored staff. Staff told us it was a mistake.
They told us not to do it, and I ignored them because I had heard
so much good information from the people in Foxfire, that I was so
persuaded that it was the right thing to do that I didn't even listen
Page 80
Janua~ 25,20000
to staff, and that was wrong, and the other is, it's made me
question the validity of the process when there are so many
questions raised about the representations we had that all of the
neighborhoods supported the closure, and my inquiry for the
county attorney is whether or not --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Can we stay on this item, and if
you support this, great, and if you have confessions or concerns
about Foxfire, this probably isn't the appropriate time for that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, it is because the only reason
that I can support this, Tim, is a bad traffic planning idea, but the
only reason I can support it is because it mitigates for a mistake
that we've previously made, and my last -- I'm almost done, I
would be done by now -- is the question for the county attorney
about what process would be appropriate for us to validate
signatures or representations that are brought to us as a part of
petitions, and I wish that you could either tell us what the process
is -- the board is not going to want to hear it right now, David, so if
we can talk about it later.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Maybe after the meeting, the two
of you can meet and talk about that.
MR. WEIGEL: I can provide that information.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We have a motion and a second.
Is there further discussion on the item before us?
Seeing none, all those in favor, please state aye.
Anybody opposed?
Motion carries five oh.
Next item is -- congratulations.
Item #8B7
FUNDING FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL
ROADWAY FROM
APPROVED
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING AND
ANALYSIS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A
RADIO ROAD TO DAVIS BOULEVARD -
Next item, 7, approve funding for the preliminary engineering
and environmental analysis for construction of roadway from
Page 81
Januaw 25,20000
Radio to Davis.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have a question while staff is
setting up for the county attorney.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Sure.
MR. WEIGEL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: David, I've been getting copied on,
as everybody has, letters from an attorney for some homeowners'
association in here that says they're going to fight us to the death
if we try to pursue this.
Have you investigated whether or not this is a legally
defensible position for us to -- before we spend 100 grand, I want
to know if we have a legally defensible position?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I think what we are talking about here
when you say legally defensible is, if the board takes the position
affirmatively toward the acquisition of property ultimately to
which we cannot achieve obtaining by purchase or gift, then we
are in an eminent domain situation, and your question is, can we
prevail in an eminent domain. I cannot -- I cannot give you the
absolute answer right now, but I will tell you that typically with
any potential road project, that would be a necessity for this
board through staff coming to it from time to time to lay the
necessary predicate and background information so we have a
higher probability of prevailing should we come to a litigation
standpoint, and incidentally, I believe a representative of the
homeowners' group is here today and is signed up as a speaker.
staff, and then
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Let's hear from
we'll get into question and answer.
MR. KANT: Good morning, commissioners.
transportation services director.
Edward Kant,
The -- at the direction, prior direction of the board, staff was
directed to negotiate with the Florida Power & Light Company to
determine if it was feasible to try to get a road along the Florida
Power & Light easement between Radio Road and Davis
Boulevard. On the visualizer, I put a sketch showing that location,
this dash line between Radio and David, approximately half a mile
to the east of the Livingston Road alignment.
In our contacts with Florida Power & Light Company, they've
Page 82
Janua~ 25,20000
indicated, and there's a letter in the package to corroborate, that
they will, in fact, discuss with us the sale of a 42 foot right-of-way
within their 110 foot right-of-way subject to a number of
conditions. Chief -- among those conditions as was brought up by
Commissioner Mac'Kie a few moments ago is that they do not
own all that right-of-way in fee. They own approximately the
northern half of it in fee, whereas the southern half, the underlying
fee interest is owned by the developers, for this discussion, of the
Moon Lake development. They have a corporate name I'm not
familiar with.
The sketch that I've just put on the visualizer shows a typical
crosssection. In the center of that right now is the existing power
line. The proposal is to provide a right-of-way to give us a two
lane roadway, and they would move their power lines outside to
the edge of their right-of-way. However, in doing so, that means
that we would also have to pursue what are called blow out
easements. The blow out easements are to accommodate -- and,
again, in your mind if you can visualize between poles, you've got
these wires, and they've got some sag to them, and as the wind
picks them up, they tend to move, and there is a certain federal
regulatory requirement for clearance distances, and so we are
required -- I should say the utility is required, and they would pass
that on to us as a condition of the approval, to obtain those
clearances with any structure.
Our understanding based on our discussions with FP&L to
this point, and again, these have been very preliminary, are that
we would be required to get 21 foot easements across the
adjacent properties, and that would be this area outside where
the new future high lines would be. They would also be
constrained, we believe, to having no structures higher than 14
feet within that easement. Again, that most likely would
accommodate pool cages and possibly the back slopes on some
homes.
Part of the proposal in front of you today would enable us to
go out and actually do the field surveying that would be necessary
to locate existing structures and find out if we have problems,
that type of thing.
Page 83
January25,20000
The action that you're being asked to look at today is to,
excuse me, to do the preliminary engineering and environmental
analysis activities, which would include things as I said, like the
inventory of the structures, the water quality and water quantity
requirements, determination of treatment strategies for
stormwater, negotiations with the property owners to secure
additional right-of-way. Traffic studies would be very important to
determine the effects at both Radio Road and Davis Boulevard
because you would now be introducing new intersections at these
roads that do not now presently exist or are not extensions of
existing intersections, and on the Davis Boulevard side, you would
have to -- we would have to get the FP -- sorry, the Florida
Department of Transportation involved.
The -- also, there are mitigation requirements and potential
endangered species determinations, and some board members
may also remember at one time a Radio Road to Davis Boulevard
connector was part of the Livingston Road corridor. However, a
number of years ago, that segment which -- which on this sketch
would be a direct southerly extension of Livingston Road, was
removed from the County's long-range transportation plan.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Just for clarification, that was
prior to any member of this sitting board right now, which would
be prior to 19 -- November of 1992.
MR. KANT: I don't have the exact date, but I do believe
you're correct.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I'm telling you, prior to
November of '92, because I didn't vote on it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is this -- that was when the
Foxfire PUD came in.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: No, Foxfire came -- thank you for
bringing that up. I'm sorry to interrupt, Ed. There's a common
misconception that this was waived for the convenience of
Foxfire. This showed for years on that north/south connector. You
see the circle, the small circle on the upper left-hand corner of the
large circle is Timber Lake. Timber Lake buildings were there,
and that's when the then commission, nobody on this board, said,
well, we're not going to knock down all those brand new
Page 84
Janua~ 25,20000
buildings. We are going to take this off.
Three or four years later, Foxfire came in and requested what
was then zoned for multi-family be changed to golf course use, but
that was three or four years after a prior commission had removed
this from the long-term plan.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I appreciate that
clarification, because I've been believing what I was reading, that
it was a Foxfire amendment, and that kind of added fuel to the
fire, but--
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Sorry, Ed, go ahead.
MR. KANT: I believe my error might have been in not trying
to pin that date down a little more exactly, but Commissioner
Constantine is absolutely correct.
However, the former alignment could still be considered an
alternative, the FP&L alignment, and we wanted to bring this to
the board's attention, because if, in fact, you authorize this study,
we would want to know whether or not you would want to have
both alignments looked at for a preliminary analysis.
We are looking at an approximate cost at this point of
$100,000. It could be somewhat more, somewhat less, because
we haven't actually come up with the scope of services yet.
If we do it this year, we would have to do it via budget
amendment from reserves. If you choose to put it into the mix as
we go through this next budget cycle, it would show up as a new
capital project.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Much the way Commissioner
Berry pointed out on a previous item on today's agenda that
conceptually something sounded great, but in practice, it wasn't
viable. It's the same thing here. Had the board, then board
prohibited Timber Lake from going up, then this would have been
a viable alternative, but I don't think it's a viable alternative to go
and look at tearing down existing structures where people live for
the purpose of doing that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So let's get that -- I need to get
that straight, because it did sound awfully good to me that we
would look at both of those alternatives.
Do we know for sure that -- what the original right-of-way, the
Page 85
January25,20000
straight ahead connection there that was removed in the Timber
Lake rezone--
MR. KANT: Excuse me, Commissioner, there was never any
right-of-way. It was a line on a piece of paper.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The straight ahead line on the
piece of paper, we know that we would have to take out houses if
we went that way?
MR. KANT: I believe that we are looking at -- as
Commissioner Constantine pointed out, there's a condominium.
There's some private homes. There's a water management
facility for Davis Boulevard that was recently installed. There's
the Foxfire golf course. A portion of that would be affected. So, there are some considerations there.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: The golf course, I don't think, is
really of concern, but when you're talking about the state, who
built Davis and put in their water management facility and they're
trying to relocate that, trying to relocate people's homes, come
on.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That really would be throwing
money away it sounds like.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I think you're looking at something
-- I looked at this before, and you're looking at probably taking out,
what was it, Ed, like three or four buildings of that apartment
complex, a total of maybe 30, 35 apartments, something like that?
MR. KANT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Something like that, so --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, that's a lot less likely to be
possible even though there may be some legal impediments to the
FP&L easement, this one is a lot more trouble.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: It's possible, but it's not cheap.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: So, there's no practical solution to
this problem.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's what it sounds like to me.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Well, I think what is the most
practical is the question before us.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: On the FP&L property, how close
do we come to anyone's backyards if we took this straight shot
Page 86
Janua~ 25,20000
through there and we got all the easements and we did everything
we had to do, how close are we going to come to someone's
backyard or home?
MR. KANT: The right-of-way line is against the backyards in
Foxfire on one side and against Moon Lake for half of it on the
other side and --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Ed, help with that. The
right-of-way line is what; 42 feet or something, but the actual
lanes are 12 feet each. So, how close is the cars zipping down
there at 50 miles an hour--
MR. KANT: I beg your pardon. I misunderstood your
question, Commissioner. That would be about 20, 35; 35, 40 feet,
give or take.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: From the yard?
MR. KANT: From the property line.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And then whatever the back --
setbacks are to the house? MR. KANT: Correct.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Mac'Kie -- I'm
sorry.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS:
get answered.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER NORRIS:
easements and relocating the
I had a question too that I didn't
Go ahead, John.
In lieu of having the blow out
power lines, I suspect I already
know the answer, but what would be the incremental cost of
bearing -- burying the power lines?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Putting them underground.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Underground.
MR. KANT: I haven't a figure, but I can tell you based on their
experience with the Grey -- I'm sorry, Pelican Marsh subdivision, it
would be significant, and our -- again, our initial discussions with
FP&L, which did include some discussion of that, indicated that
they were less than lukewarm about that. It causes them some
maintenance issues.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I spoke with FP&L on the same
Page 87
January25,20000
question, and their issue there -- those are not just standard light
appliances. Those are major carries for their system. They go all
the way north and south.
So, if they can't get access to them, you can have like forty
or 50,000 homes without power for an extended period of time.
So, they weren't too enthusiastic about trying to do that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: One more, and then let's go to
the public. I suspect we have some speakers.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ed, do you have or does somebody
have a map you could put on the visualizer that would show us
what portion of the area is owned by FP&L in fee and what portion
over which they have only easement rights?
MR. KANT: The best I can do is on this small map,
commissioners. As I say, approximately halfway is the Moon Lake
property and then north of that, the other half would be what they
own in fee. Perhaps the Moon Lake folks, if they make a
comment, can give you an exact dimension.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But Moon Lake owns the
southerly half in fee; is that true?
MR. KANT: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Let's go to the public speakers.
MR. McNEES: First speaker is Rick Miller, followed by
Jackson Bowman.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: How many do we have?
MR. McNEES: Three.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Ed, it took me two weeks to get
over it. I hope you --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Good afternoon.
MR. MILLER: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
commissioners. Rick Miller with National Development.
fellow
We purchased most of the remaining undeveloped portions of
Moon Lake, and as such, I have a fairly -- very significant
investment in the land and infrastructure within Moon Lake on
which we intend to develop another 75 homes. We also own
approximately 1,700 lineal feet of the FP&L easement south of the
Foxfire connection.
As such, I'm also president of the Moon Lake Homeowners'
Page 88
Janua~ 25,20000
Association, and we just want to go on record today that we are,
obviously, very opposed to having a new road being built in our
backyard adjacent to not only existing homes but also proposed
homes for which we've made a significant investment to date. I'm
sure that there's -- I think there's about 50 or 60 Foxfire
homeowners who are adjacent to this who probably will feel
equally inconvenienced.
I think I'd like to point out a couple of things. This will be a
very expensive road according to estimates so far that I've seen.
You can only build apparently a two lane road there forever. So, if
you're attempting to solve a transportation issue, you're using a
Band-Aid here. I think everywhere else you would try to create
maybe a four lane opportunity or six lane opportunity down the
road, and you don't have that here.
Secondly, you're talking about a road that really goes
nowhere. There's no opportunity for it to go north today, and I
don't believe there's any opportunity for it to go south without a
continued battle through existing neighborhoods.
I think thirdly, problematic are your intersections at both
Radio and Davis. You don't have good separations, and I'm sure
DOT is not going to be -- it's not going to embrace these
connections.
New information today or that I got from staff recently is this
blowout easement. I don't even know how that impacts the many
residents that currently live there, their houses, their backyards,
pool cages, you know, I can't even begin to fathom that. Does
that mean Moon Lake loses their rec. facility, their pool or any of
those type of facilities and what impact does that have on the 150
or so residents that live there?
So, I think it's certainly a can of worms to put it mildly, and
it's a very expensive alternative to propose that has only a
short-term solution.
So, we would just like to go on record that we are very
opposed to the proposed road and how it will impact existing
neighborhoods and propose and would hope that you can look at a
different alternative alignment if you do, in fact, need an
alignment.
Page 89
Janua~ 25,20000
I thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Jackson Bowman, and your last speaker would
be Peter Speirs.
MR. BOWMAN: Mr. Commissioner-- Mr. Chairman and
commissioners, my name is Jackson Bowman, and I'm with the
law firm of Brigham, Moore, Gaylord, Schuster, Merlin & Tobin,
and I'm privileged to be here today on behalf of Caya Costa at
Moon Lake and the Moon Lake Homeowners' Association.
I don't know if you're familiar or not, but the Moon Lake
Homeowners' Association comprises 205 lots south of Radio
Road, north of Davis Road, and as you've heard, east of Foxfire.
You heard from staff today that they are requesting funding
to study engineering and environmental issues, and I'm thinking
that it's maybe appropriate to add something else to the mix.
Caya Costa at Moon Lake and the Moon Lake Homeowners'
Association has some concerns, and, of course, the major
concern is cost, and I've seen the memorandum that Mr. Ilschner
prepared for you-all as well as the executive summary that was
submitted for today's agenda, and there were no costs delineated
for the acquisition of the underlying fee interest, nor were there
costs delineated for the blowout easements, and with that in
mind, if you take an underlying fee interest and property, you're
opening yourself up to severance damages to the remaining
property, and I would tell you that -- that the homeowners'
association as well as those lots that Caya Costa and Moon Lake
owns will be looking at severance damages.
So, with that in mind, we would ask you to expand the budget
and provide funding to study the cost, and with that in mind as
well, we'd ask you that you try and expedite the time frame for
this process because every moment that goes on, additional
damages are suffered by everybody in there, and we appreciate
you very much moving this from the consent agenda item so that
we can address you today, and we thank staff, Mr. Kant and Mr.
Bibby for meeting with us last week and expressing their views to
US.
Thank you very much.
Page 90
Januaw 25,20000
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Speirs.
MR. SPEIRS: Good afternoon. My name is Peter Speirs. I'm a
resident homeowner of Moon Lake and a board member of the
home lake -- start again.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Been there.
MR. SPEIRS: Thank you. And a board member of the Moon
Lake Homeowners' Association.
I'm sure what I'm going to say today will be a little
duplication of what has already been said, and I'll be as prompt
and quick as I can.
The Moon Lake development has suffered for many years
from the well-known syndrome, absentee landowner. Tim
Constantine has been extremely supportive and assisted us in our
time of need.
We now have a very reputable developer who has
constructed three super model homes, and the commissioners
today are considering a decision to fund a survey to construct a
road which would cost the County at least nine million. Nine
million dollars is an awful lot of money.
When the county commissioners first considered building a
road on this land running through the Moon Lake development,
they were, I believe, under the impression that the land belonged
to FP&L. I wish to make it clear before the commission today that
the first part of this land that FP&I. called their own is, in fact,
owned by the homeowners' association. We have granted FP&L
an easement and only an easement. They have no right to be
discussing the purchase of the land.
The other parcel of that land required I believe encroaches
on the new developed land, which is the National Development
Company of America. There is, therefore, an enormous land
purchase price to be considered, which would make the Davis
Boulevard/Radio Road shortcut a heavy price for the local
taxpayers to bear.
There is also a strong possibility, according to the County
memo dated the 14th of October, 1999, that 12 existing Moon
Lake homeowners -- sorry, 12 existing Moon Lake homes would
Page 91
January25,20000
have to be removed to make way for this two track road. That's
actually stated in that memo. I know it's a problem.
The road proposal also plans to use land which is currently
Moon Lake's entry and exit via Foxfire established some -- more
than 12 years ago. Moon Lake was originally built with exits both
at Davis Boulevard and Foxfire stroke Radio Road with emergency
safety as part of the design feature. Very careful and serious
consideration must be made by the commissioners today to take
one of those exits away, and that's what would happen.
The commissioners will recall the support that Moon Lake
residents gave to the decision to make Foxfire a gated
community. We never imagined that the cost of our support would
be a road running through our land, and we feel we have been very
misled by the county commission.
I believe, therefore, in summary, the commissioners should
reconsider their alternatives, which are, as have been described
earlier, the re-opening of Foxfire as one alternative, and the
second, probably the most sensible one to consider, purchase of
the land that is currently used as an additional nine hole golf
course, which we know will affect a few homes, and this is on
Foxfire -- Foxfire property, and it's also referred to on Page 14 of
the County memo, October 14th, 1999.
Commissioners, having kindly listened to me and to my
points of objection today, I would strongly urge you to vote no to
the approval of the funds required for the survey under discussion.
Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, there's a lot of questions
about this, and it just seems to me we need to answer the
questions in our mind. I make a motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We have a motion for approval.
I've got a question before we see if there's a second on that.
Ed, the second speaker mentioned -- obviously, there's a lot
of answers (sic} that are unanswered, and the only way we're
going to get them is if we do this. However, are the cost issues
going to be included? When you come back with this information,
the cost issues will be part of that?
Page 92
January25,20000
MR. KANT: Yes, Commissioner. In the executive summary,
we've given you an estimate of about 6.8 million, and based on our
just taking a very, very rough swipe at this, we've tried to include
things like the FP&L modifications, the roadway easement,
mitigation and permitting, the aerial easements, the surveys, the
design work and then there's actually the cost of the two lane
urban roadway section.
So, we've tried to cover that, but we'd have to -- the whole
point of this study is to try to refine that and come back to you
with some better numbers and
problems may be encountered.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
second speaker in particular had
some better ideas of what
And the other question the
was how quickly can we get
those answers? Is there a way to expedite that?
MR. KANT: We would think that -- again, if we do it this year,
we can do it under -- again, if the cost is within our budget, we
can do it with a budget amendment under our annual contracts,
and we would think that it would take approximately three to six
months to do an adequate job. I don't want to give you a
compressed time schedule only to find out we have unanswered
questions.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And just to clarify, what you're
asking for today is the ability to go and research all that and come
back with specific answers? This isn't asking for an approval of
that roadway?
MR. KANT: That's correct. We may find, for whatever
reasons, that there are issues that might preclude the board
deciding to go forward.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just a couple of questions. What
is the -- what would -- what's the traffic volume that would be
anticipated after Livingston is in place, the number of trips? I've
heard --
MR. KANT: That's one of the questions we need to answer.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, but we've heard that thrown
around. I mean, it's not--
MR. KANT: Well, Commissioner, we've heard numbers of like
Page 93
January25,20000
20,000, 17,000 bandied about, and unless and until we know what
the routing is and we can do some reasonable engineering
estimating, I'm loathe to give you an answer, but it could be
10,000 vehicles, it could be twenty, I don't know.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. What's the capacity of a
two lane roadway there?
MR. KANT: The capacity of this type of roadway with
minimal number of connections is probably in the neighborhood of
about fifteen to 18,000 comfortably.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, it's possible that it -- the
question that was raised earlier about a two lane road is a
Band-Aid, it's possible that a two lane road might be adequate to
offset the traffic that we anticipate? I mean, again, you don't
have a number, but if it's in the --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Anything is possible, but until
you do the study, you don't know the answer. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And there's no feed into this road
from the sides?
MR. KANT: The only one would be the -- as the one
gentleman mentioned, there's an existing back door, for lack of a
better expression, from Moon Lake to Foxfire. There are two --
again, there are two potentials. One is to connect that to the
road, and the other is not to. I believe that in order to maintain
the integrity of that connection for the Moon Lake people, we
would examine it with that connection in place. So, that would be
the only connection that I can think of.
There's also an FP&L substation at the south end near Davis,
and we'd have to look at whether they would access that from the
road or from Davis. That's a question, a technical issue that has
to be answered.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And there's no removal of any
properties, I mean homes or condos on the FP&L strip.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
MR. KANT: Well, I can't -- that's one of the questions that
needs to be answered because of the issue with the aerial
easements, and we need to do, first of all, a survey to determine
Page 94
Janua~ 25,20000
the location of what's on the ground. Then we need to go back to
FP&L. They've told us on the one hand that maybe they can
handle something up to 14 feet tall. In talking with Mr. Hellriegel
just recently, he says, well, now maybe they're talking about
whether they would allow anything under those easements. So, there's a lot of questions here.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Obviously, that's a pretty key
question.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Part of it.
MR. KANT: I don't want to stand here and give you
information that I'm going to have to stand here six months from
now and say, oh, I was wrong.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Right.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: So, that's why we have to do the
study, to find out if we can answer those questions.
MR. KANT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We have a motion from
Commissioner Norris. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: There's a second. Further
discussion.
Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion, state aye.
Anybody opposed?
Five oh.
MR. KANT: May I -- may I infer from that that you would
prefer to have us do that as a budget amendment this year?.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Probably, yeah.
Hang on just a second. For the folks who live in that area,
this may actually be -- don't get too discouraged by that. It may
be your salvation, because if that -- by the tone of the questions,
we don't have answers, and you can't rule anything out until we
have the answers. Obviously, if we get into impinging on people's
homes and those things, our enthusiasm for this wanes. So, this
study may actually be more help than you think.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And you know, just to preface
what Tim is saying, you may already know the answers. It may be
perfectly obvious to you that it is going to be A, B and C, but we
Page 95
Janua~ 25,20000
have to have engineering studies. We have to have the reports
that tell us, and that's what we're asking for. Don't hear today's
vote as a support for the road.
MR. KANT: Thank you, commissioners.
When we come back with the work order request, we'll also
come back with the budget amendment approval.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We are going to take a lunch
break. Let's be back at 1:15.
(Lunch break was held).
Item #8D1
CONSULTANT SELECTION FOR COUNTY
VACANCY - MERCER GROUP APPROVED
ADMINISTRATOR
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Hi. We're back. Item 8D(1),
Consultant Selection for County Administrator Vacancy.
Jennifer, I understand we have two applicants from inhouse.
MS. EDWARDS: We do. We have --
THE COURT REPORTER: Would you please identify yourself for
the record?
MS. EDWARDS: Jennifer Edwards, excuse me, Human
Resources Director.
We have the Interim Administrator, Mike McNees, has applied,
as well as Tom Olliff, who is our Public Services Administrator.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Very kind of you to stand in
between them right now.
MS. EDWARDS: After last week's meeting, I developed a list of
six consultants and I included the Range Rider Program in that
and I contacted each of those consultants, and three of them
responded and I prepared for you an analysis of their responses.
And after our review in Human Resources, we did make a
recommendation. We recommended Racklin, Cohen and Holtz.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: They're not the $20,000 ones.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: No.
MS. EDWARDS: No. They're the $2800 one; however,
Page 96
Janua~ 25,20000
yesterday, I did receive a response from the Range Rider Program.
And their -- Range Rider is a program that's sponsored by the
Florida City and County Management Association and the
City-County Management Association or ICMA.
And what they do is they have volunteers from retired
city-county managers, and they come around and help counties
and cities that need assistance in management. They did respond
yesterday and their price is better than anyone's because their
price is zero.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: What a great price!
Commissioner Norris, did you have a question?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I just want to make a comment. We
ended up with only two applicants. I've been on the board seven
years, so have you. We've worked with both of these applicants
for seven years.
Commissioner Mac'Kie has worked with them for five years,
Barbara Berry for three. Mr. Carter just had the pleasure of one
year, but I know both of these gentlemen quite well. I know their
qualifications quite well. I know their work history. I know
everything about them as it pertains to the job. I have no interest
in having a consultant tell me that either Tom Olliff or Mike
McNees is highly qualified for this job. I think it's pointless.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Carter.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I really still am at the position
where I believe we should use the outside consultant to put it
through what I call the objective screen. No matter how long you
know them -- and I respect both of them a great deal. That's not
the issue for me. I would like the outside input to do the
assessment, to give us the feedback.
I'm a little puzzled as to the selection of Racklin for the
consultant job. My independent analysis would say The Mercer
Group is far more qualified to do this type of thing because that is
their business. The Racklin group is primarily a CPA firm to the
person that came on board just recently to take over that position
of doing a search.
So, I'm going to stay with my position. I like the outside
consultant to review no matter who applies, or whether we had
Page 97
January25,20000
two or 20 or one for the screening process, and I would prefer to
see us go with The Mercer Group.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Berry, any
thoughts?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, I'll go back to my first
statement. I think to keep it clean and to keep it -- everything the
way we should, I think it -- I would have to tend to agree with Jim
in this instance, that let them go ahead and at least take a look at
the candidates.
I would hope in this -- and, Jim, maybe you can clarify a little
bit of this for me. When they do this, do they tell you the pros, the
cons, to give you those kinds of things in their judgment?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes. That's their job is to look at
our criteria, look at the background of whoever applies, come
back to you and say, here's -- here's the strengths and excesses --
the strengths and weaknesses, whatever terms you want to use.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And then it's -- you know, it's our
ultimate decision. They're going to give us that objective outside
input.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I would hope before we move
forward with this that we look at that, the strengths and
weaknesses, pros and cons, but not ask them to rank the
candidates because --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: No.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: -- I
making the ultimate selection for us.
be able to give us an objective view.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes.
don't need somebody else
I just want them to maybe
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Mac'Kie, are you in
favor of that?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If it is going with the screen without
a ranking, yeah.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Do we have any public speakers
on this item?
MR. McNEES: You have none.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Would somebody like to make a
Page 98
January25,20000
motion to give direction to staff?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I'd like to make a motion that
we select The Mercer Group to be the screen for this process.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Why did staff recommend Racklin
and also are you now recommending the statewide group Range
Riders?
MS. EDWARDS: We recommended Racklin because --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I keep thinking that's Boy Scouts
instead, but Range Riders --
MS. EDWARDS: That's what they're called.
Racklin submitted a more thorough proposal on the process
they're going to follow than did Mercer, and I know Mercer has
been in the business for three years.
And as Commissioner Carter stated the person that is going to
be performing the work for Racklin has a lot of experience as a
city-county type manager.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I suspect that's the only
reason they got in the business is this guy came to them and fills
a niche in their market and I'm always a little troubled by that,
frankly --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Range Rider Program, do you think
it's a good idea, bad idea? Why?
MS. EDWARDS: I think it's a good idea because I talked with
the gentleman who will be doing our work. His name is Mr.
Tipton. He has recently retired as the city manager of Orlando
and has, he told me on the phone, approximately 40 years of
experience and is available next week and would be -- he would
ask that he come in and talk to each of you individually to get a
thorough understanding of your requirements and then he would
also interview the applicants.
COMMISSIONER BERRY:
because he certainly knows
required.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
I kind of like that idea myself
the practical aspects of what's
I do, too, and part of that is Florida
Page 99
Janua~ 25,20000
is a unique animal, the way our counties are set up, and if he has
that practical experience here, there's an upside to that.
Commissioner Carter --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: My -- my objection -- I guess I'm on
the opposite side of all of this.
My objection is you could be in a position 40 years, 20 years,
30 years. It does not mean that you're a professional interviewer
in assessment capabilities of other people. I would rather deal
with someone who does this day in and day out, it is their
profession and that's what they're qualified to do. Nothing
against the Range Riders. I just would rather keep it in the
professional environment, more professional environment.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Well, we have a motion and a
second and there are no public speakers, you said. Let's go
ahead and see what's the pleasure of the board?
All those in favor of the motion, state aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Opposed?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion carries four-one. The
Mercer Group will be here -- how quickly do you think they'll be in
town?
MS. EDWARDS: I'll have to begin negotiating an agreement
with them and I can't tell you now what the date would be.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: You think they'll be here before
June?
MS. EDWARDS: May I recommend that we authorize the
chairman to be perhaps the contact person with the consultant to
help coordinate the effort?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's appropriate.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: That will probably pass on a
four-one vote.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think that comes with the job,
Page 100
Janua~ 25,20000
Tim.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: All right.
Item #9A
EXPERT FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACQUISITION OF PARCELS
106A, 106B, 706 AND 806 IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER
COUNTY V. NAPLES ITALIAN AMERICAN CLUB, INC., ET AL.,
CASE NO. 98-1672-CA-01 (AIRPORT ROAD SIC-LANING PROJECT
FROM PINE RIDGE ROAD TO VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD -
APPROVED
Next item, expert fees, R.E. lawsuit versus the Italian
American Club.
Mr. Weigel, 9(A).
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. There is before you -- there was a
handout. It's an add on, and I don't know if you have any
questions that came in today's agenda so we wouldn't have a
delay in making payments in kind of a timely fashion here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve the staff
recommendations.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion and a second. Is there any
discussion?
Are there any public speakers?
Any objection?
Item #10A
RESOLUTION 2000-30, APPOINTING JACK BAXTER TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL - ADOPTED
Seeing none, motion carries five-oh, which takes us to 10(A) to
appoint --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve Michael Simonik.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: -- to appoint one member to fulfill
a remainder of a vacant term.
Page101
January25,20000
We have a motion. Is there a second for that motion?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Let me ask. Is Michael Simonik still
an employee of the Conservancy?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He is.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I believe he is.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: He is? I don't -- I thought we were
not doing that sort of thing anymore.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Remember --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: The lobbying and --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- they did all that. That gave us
some -- when Ramiro was here, they gave us that big speech
about that working for an organization that has a particular bent
is not the same as working for an organization that has -- won't
stand to make money by decisions.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Is there a second for the motion?
If not, it will die for a lack of a second.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I'd like to --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Is there an alternative motion?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: -- nominate Jack Baxter.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Is there a second for --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We have a motion and a second for
Jack Baxter.
Any discussion on that?
We have no public speakers?
All those in favor, please state aye.
Anybody opposed?
(No response.}
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE Motion carries five-oh.
Item #10B
RESOLUTION 2000-31, APPOINTING TARA LA GRAND TO THE
ISLE OF CAPRI FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE -
ADOPTED
10(B}, appointment of the Isle of Capri Control District Advisory
Page 102
Januaw 25,20000
Board, one member, one name.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: One applicant, one position.
COMMISSIONER MAG'KIE: I move Tara LaGrand.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion from Commissioner Berry.
I'll take that is a second --
COMMISSIONER MAG'KIE: That will do.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: -- from Commissioner Mac'Kie.
Any discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor, please state aye.
Motion carries five-oh.
Item #10C
RESOLUTION 2000-32 APPOINTING GEORGE P. PONTE AND DON
W. KINCAID TO THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT
BOARD - ADOPTED
The next one has two
Enforcement Board.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
applicants.
vacancies on
Motion
the Collier County Code
to approve the two
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Coincidentally, two applicants.
We have a motion to approve those two applicants.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And a second from Commissioner
Carter.
All those in favor of the motion, please state aye.
Anyone opposed? (No response.}
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion carries by an unanimous
acclaim.
Item #1 OD
DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE
HARRIS ACT (H. B. 659} - CONSENSUS TO SEND A LETTER OF
OPPOSITION
Page 103
January25,20000
10(D), Discussion regarding the proposed Amendment to the
Harris Act.
I just wanted to mention this. All of you hopefully saw a memo
on it. There is an amazing coincidence. A piece of legislation
pending does not have a partner piece in the Senate right now,
but we want to make sure it doesn't. That would change the
Harris Act, which is a private property rights act, that if you
change agricultural property to something fewer than one unit per
five acres, your government would now be penalized.
Clearly, this is aimed towards those efforts us and perhaps
other counties are making to protect ag property as forever ag
property.
And interesting that it coincidentally comes up this year. I
wanted to see if the board would have any objection if we wrote a
letter to our state representative and state senator opposing
House Bill 659 --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So moved.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: -- and outlining the reasons why.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I would second that. I've already
written a letter and I would agree, Mr. Chairman, that's the
appropriate thing to do.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I'll probably plagiarize your letter.
Do we have a --
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I would suspect that this will end up
with a companion bill in the Senate.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: That's my fear. Hopefully our own
folks here will bite and scrap and show --
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Because this has come about, if you
look at the people that are sponsoring this, I believe almost all of
them are representatives that because of the term limits will not
be in office next year.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Right.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: So, I suspected that if that's the
same situation in the Senate that you will probably see a
companion bill.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: This is special interests at its
worst.
Page 104
Janua~ 25,20000
Do we have any speakers on this item?
MR. McNEES: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I don't know that we need a formal
as long as everybody is comfortable with that letter going on.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: None.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Good.
Would you take substantive public comments on general
topics.
Any speakers, Mr. McNees?
MR. McNEES: You have none.
Item #12B2
ORDINANCE 2000-07, RE PETITION PUD-98-17(1), BLAIR A.
FOLEY, P.E. OF COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.,
REPRESENTING TRANSEASTERN PROPERTIES, INC.,
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "PUD" TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS WHITTENBERG ESTATES PUD ,
LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD (S.R. 84)
EAST OF WHITTEN DRIVE, CONSISTING OF 38+/- ACRES -
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Advertised public hearings. Let's
go to 12(B) -- yeah, 12(B)(2), Petition PUD-98-17, Blair Foley.
Anybody who wants to participate in this one, I need you to
stand and be sworn in. (Speakers sworn.)
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Hi there.
MS. MURRAY: Hello. Susan Murray from current planning staff.
This is a very simple PUD to PUD rezone simply to adopt a new
PUD in order to reduce the side yard setback requirements for
single family detached dwelling units from seven and a half feet to
five feet.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Have we heard any objection to
this from anybody?
MS. MURRAY: Only a negative vote from one planning
commissioner who basically objects to five-foot side yard
Page 105
January25,20000
setbacks is what this --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Ah, yeah. I think I heard that.
Let's go ahead and hear from the petitioner because it is routine
and if we have questions for staff, we can come back. Mr. Foley.
MR. FOLEY: For the record, Blair Foley, representing the
petitioner.
I have nothing further to add. I'd be happy to answer any
questions and the developer, Transeastern Properties, is here
with us to help answer any questions if you may have any.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Berry?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: How many existing dwellings would
this affect? In other words --
MR. FOLEY: It doesn't affect any density issues at all.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, no, no. That's not her question.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: That's not what I meant. In other
words, are there current residences in this area, dwellings in this
unit that would have the seven-and-a-half-foot setback?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is anybody going to get a house
closer?.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Are these --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: These aren't existing --
MR. FOLEY: Nothing exists, nothing is built.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: That's my question. Okay.
MR. FOLEY: Okay. That's--
COMMISSIONER BERRY: It took us a little bit to get there. I'm
sorry.
MR. FOLEY: My fault.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Anybody else want to speak to
this item?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I mean, I -- if it's -- I don't have any
questions of the petitioner, I don't have any questions of staff, but
I am going to vote against this because last week we had the
same issue here. I think it's just a continuous repetition. You
already had a PUD you brought to us. You were comfortable with
what you had.
Last week a guy comes in and he says, well, we're going to
Page 106
January25,20000
build it bigger and closer together. You're in here asking the
same thing. I suspect every meeting I'm going to get the same
thing, so I'm going to draw my line in the sand and vote for denial.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
what's the minimum under
concomitant?
Question for staff?
Sure.
Is the new minimum
standard zoning that
setback --
would be
MS. MURRAY: If I understand your question correctly,
generally, five feet is an acceptable minimal standard and has
been approved in many PUD's throughout Collier County.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, this still exceeds the minimum.
MS. MURRAY: Well, this is right at the minimum, which would
be five feet.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry. Yeah, it's going down
from seven and a half to five. I -- I don't have a problem with it.
It's, I assume, market driven, and that's, you know, God bless
We have yet another speaker
Roy Ramsey with Transeastern
address Commissioner Carter's
America.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
representing the petitioner.
MR. RAMSEY: My name is
Corporation and I'd like to
concern.
This was additional land added to an existing PUD and the prior
zoning called for 200 plus units of villas. At the time that this was
-- that it went through the Collier County Planning Commission, we
created access to the community, and at the time the
development standards for the other -- the existing old PUD had
the seven-and-a-half-foot setbacks for single family.
Within Glenn Eagle PUD, all of the single-family communities
have a five-foot setback, so that if this petition were approved, it
would mean that all single-family villages, if you will, inside the
Glenn Eagle Community would then be the same and compatible.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Why wasn't this addressed earlier?
I mean, I -- I guess I'm still a little confused. Why didn't -- wasn't
this always here?
Page 107
January25,20000
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: This wasn't always part of Glenn
Eagle.
MR. RAMSEY: Somebody is actually--
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Somebody's buying this and trying
to attach it to an existing community.
MR. FOLEY: If I may, Commissioner Carter, this was a different
developer that owned the property initially when we did the PUD
work. Transeastern came in and took an interest in this piece and
added a connector road. They're just trying to have some
congruency between the developer now.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: To the developer's credit, you may
recall when it came in. There was some discussion over what the
appropriate access to Davis would be. This will actually take that
issue away and you'll be connecting through Glenn Eagle.
MR. RAMSEY: Correct.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Anything else? Any other
speakers?
We'll close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Move approval.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: There's a motion and a second.
Any discussion?
Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion, state aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Aye.
Anybody opposed?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion carries four-one.
Item #12Cl
ORDINANCE 2000-08, AMENDING ORDINANCE 91-102, AS
AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE -
ADOPTED
Page 108
January25,20000
Moving on to 12(C)(1), the item is an ordinance amending --
amending Ordinance Number 9t-102. We call it the sign
ordinance.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' It actually does a few other things,
doesn't it?
MR. NINO: Ron Nino for the record.
That and a few other things. This is really the culmination of
your final hearing to amendments to the land development code.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Nothing has changed since we
went through our laundry list two weeks ago.
MR. NINO: Nothing has changed. We have not heard of any
objection to the amendments as proposed excepting the sign
provisions, which I suspect there will be some discussion here
today.
Unless there is anyone here who now has a problem with all of
the amendments, with any of the amendments, save and except
the sign ordinance, we're ready to deal with the sign ordinance.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Great. I believe we have six public
speakers.
MR. McNEES: We do. Your first is Vera Fitz-Gerald, followed by
Don Pickworth.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Mr. Pickworth, if you could just
come up to the on-deck circle and be ready.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: I don't have a whole lot to add other than
what I --
THE COURT REPORTER: Ma'am, could you identify yourself for
the record?
MS. FITZ-GERALD: I'm Vera Fitz-Gerald.
The people -- the business people have been saying how they
live in this community and how they want to make sure everything
is very nice and they don't think that we need to tighten up the
sign ordinance. All you need to do is drive down Cleveland
Boulevard in Fort Myers to see what the business people will do if
they don't have some sort of regulation.
I'm sure the people in Fort Myers say the same thing. We live
here. We like to see it nice.
I'm sorry. I don't mean to dump on Fort Myers, but Cleveland
Page 109
Janua~ 25,20000
Boulevard is not nice.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: They're wonderful people with a
bad sign ordinance.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: And I don't want to see that so I hope that
you don't be swayed by these silly things like I need a sign to lure
people in. You don't. Okay?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: That's all I've got to say.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Mr. Pickworth will be followed by --
MR. McNEES: Fred Alander.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: All right.
MR. PICKWORTH: I'm Don Pickworth representing McDonald's.
I'm just here to say that we support the changes as set forth in --
in the amendment that you've been given today.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: The latest and greatest version.
MR. PICKWORTH: I would only hope that, you know, it sort of
stays stable for a reasonable length of time at this point.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I hope so, too.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Alander then followed by Michael Boyd.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Michael, if you could come up just
so we don't have 60 seconds between each speaker. MR. PICKWORTH: Sorry about that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: That's quite all right.
MR. ALANDER: My name is Fred Alander. I own Spanky's
Speakeasy. I've had it for 16 years, 17, 18 years, something like
that. Now you're trying to take my neon away from me and
everything else.
And I haven't -- I talked to Mr. Norris and I talked to Mr. Carter,
and all he said to me was, if I had to buy appropriate permits,
which I do, all permitted to put up, now they want to take the
damn stuff down.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: That's not entirely accurate, Freddy.
The proposal in front of us today is that anything that's legal
under the 1991 sign ordinance does not have to come down.
MR. ALANDER: Does not. So, I'm legal is what you're saying?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: If you're legal under the 1991.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: If you're legal under the 1991 sign
Page 110
January25,20000
ordinance, yes, you're legal. It does not have to come down.
However, if you modify it or it gets torn up by a hurricane or
something like that, then it's gone.
MR. ALANDER: Yeah, I understand that. I can live with that
part of it, but I got a lot of money invested in that stuff.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Once again, as long as you're legal
today, you don't have to take it down.
MR. ALANDER: To my knowledge, I am anyway. I got the
permits way back --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Okay.
MR. ALANDER: -- when? 16 years ago, something like that.
Maybe --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, that's before 1991.
MR. ALANDER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: It has to conform to the 1991 sign
ordinance, which I think it does.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: They're not a whole lot of changes
between '86 and '91, but we'll -- I'm sure Chahram or someone will
be happy to help you -- not right now -- but help you figure that out
whether or not it is, so --
MR. ALANDER: I've got my sign man here. Let him figure it
out.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. ALANDER: Have a good day.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Michael.
MR. McNEES: Michael will be followed by Dawn Jantsch.
MR. BOYD: For the record, my name is Michael Boyd.
I can support most of what we've got in here now. As Fred
alluded to, I do have some questions.
Fred has a lot of -- I won't say a lot of. He has border neon on
the building.
Prior to '96, I don't believe we really had anything in the code
governing border neon, so that would be my question, is he going
to be forced to remove that neon? There was never a code
governing it.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I believe I just answered that --
MR. BOYD: Okay.
Page 111
January25,20000
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- if I'm not mistaken.
MR. BOYD: We were just looking for clarification.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: They can correct if I didn't answer it
properly, but I'm sure I did.
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Chahram Badamtchian from Planning
Services Staff. Exterior neon stays. The only thing that Spanky's
has is neon signs on the inside of the building visible through the
window, and those they have three years to remove them. I
believe that's what he was alluding to when he talked about his
signs.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, move the interior neons
sometime in the next three years, please.
MR. BOYD: Okay. Well, he's got a classic example. He's got a
wall of beer signs that are probably 50 feet from the front
windows, but as you drive by, you can see them.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If you see it from the road, it's not
legal.
MR. BOYD: Okay.
MR. ALANDER: How about if I tint my windows?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: They'll talk about that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
Our next speaker?.
MR. McNEES: Dawn Jantsch and your last speaker would be
Mike Davis.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you. Funny how that
always works out.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I was just going to say what -- does
he have some kind of impeccable timing?
MS. JANTSCH: Good after -- pardon me. Good afternoon.
Dawn Jantsch. I don't want to be speechless today.
I want to thank the commission for looking and listening to the
concerns of the business community and for making the changes
that you did make to the ordinance.
I would also like to ask that you consider putting into the
record today that the sign ordinance will not be looked at by the
consultant that we have hired as a county.
I think this is an excellent ordinance as we have currently in
Page112
January25,20000
place. The Naples chamber will not be opposing the changes that
are in this current revision that we've seen and we appreciate
your working with the business community on this.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Mr. Davis.
MR. DAVIS: Mike Davis, Signcraft, for the record.
And I think you turn your slip in first and you speak last or it
seems that's how it works or something. I don't know. I'd make
an observation. I -- I've read the latest draft that you have several
times, and I would agree. It's certainly right on the money,
reflective of the board direction at the last meeting which,
needless to say, I looked very carefully at.
Just -- just a couple of items I'd like to get on the record, as the
attorneys say. You know, the first thing is that I would ask of
staff that if a change of a tenant on an existing directory sign
does not require a permit.
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: No, it does not require a permit as long as
the size of the sign you're replacing is the same.
MR. DAVIS: And I'd ask of the board that the discussion
concerning logo shapes as it pertains to signs, I think that
discussion was for free-standing signs.
And as I read the -- the code the way it's amended, it is
directed at free-standing signs.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: As opposed to what?
MR. DAVIS: A wall sign.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I thought that the logo could exist
as long as it was within a normal geometric shape.
MR. DAVIS: Which bears out in my case that we're talking
about free-standing signs because they are a normal geometric
shape as opposed to a wall sign that's often individual channel
letters made up of a variety of shapes.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Like a big Ky for example.
MR. DAVIS: That's a logo. That's just my point.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh.
MR. DAVIS: If you say, yes, I think everything works. If you
say no, I think we have a big problem.
Page 113
January25,20000
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Then you have to put a big block of
asphalt or something, concrete, behind the K. Okay.
MR. DAVIS: I'm just anticipating problems in the future.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I don't have -- I understand what
Mike is saying and I think I'm okay with that. I guess what we're
always trying to say on the Iogos, we're trying to get away from
somebody sticking an ice cream cone out and the like of that
stuff.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: So, as long as it's limited to free
standing, that's what you're looking for. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yeah.
MR. DAVIS: Exactly. I think then there's no problem in the
future.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, if somebody --
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just let me get it. If my logo is an
ice cream cone and I want to stick it to the side of the building, I
can do that. True, Chahram?
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: True, as long as your ice cream cone and
your name with, you mentioned, your box drawn around it, doesn't
exceed 20 percent, you can do that. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. DAVIS: And I think Mr. Constantine's example is probably
a better one. The big K on the side of the building is one thing,
but a big K in the shape of a K on the top of a pole is what you all
said you didn't want.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Right.
MR. DAVIS: I would just want to make that distinction so that
as we go forward we have no misunderstandings.
The one -- the one other thing, and I'd ask -- I'd ask this of you.
One of the concerns a lot of the people from the community have,
me included early on, was why should we go ahead and do this
now when we've got the select committee on community
character form, consultant seemed to be negotiated for contract,
and it was answered through the board discussions that if we
were going to go forward and do this now, then we can remove
Page 114
Januaw 25,20000
that from the consultants contract because we're -- we're ahead
of the curve on that.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Thereby saving taxpayers' money.
MR. DAVIS: I believe that's exactly what I heard,
Commissioner Norris.
And I would ask that staff be directed today to do so, so that in
fact that does happen and, quite frankly, a lot of my customers
I've spoken with do not have heartburn with this once I've
explained it to them. But I'll tell you what. If a consultant comes
back in 12 or 14 months and changes it again, they're going to
have a lot of heartburn, and rightfully so, I think.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: You know, we get accused of
being knuckleheads every now and again, but we're not that
dumb. Hopefully, we will not come back in 12 months and uproot
this whole thing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd like not to talk about signs again
for a long time myself.
MR. DAVIS: Well, if you take it out of the contract, I think that
will assure it for some length of time.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Fair enough.
MR. DAVIS: I know the industry would just as soon not be here
doing this for quite awhile.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, we're taking commercial
signage out, but municipal signage stays in that contract as a part
of the overall community character effort. And I think that's --
we're all in agreement on that, Mike. MR. DAVIS: Thank you.
And I agree with you, Commissioner Carter, that the municipal
signage is still an issue that we have to tackle.
One last thing. The only heartburn that I have heard is the
number of the -- on directories we talked about it or you talked
about a minimum of tenants on the directory and a maximum of
eight.
I've heard a lot from the business community, and I think if you
were inclined to increase that eight up to 10 or 12, I think it would
make a big difference, remembering that you're talking about a
sign that's 150 square feet in area.
Page 115
January25,20000
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: The only way I'd be willing to
increase that number is if they were also required to be uniform in
lettering and colors, which I think would make some people
squeal. But when you have all different size, shapes, colors,
everything on there, then it's a hodgepodge, and I think that's
what we're trying to get away from.
If you've got 12 different shapes and colors on there, then,
frankly, it does more harm than it does good if you're driving by,
trying to figure it out.
MR. DAVIS: Then we'll leave it be because writing language at
this point in time, as you said, we're not knuckleheads either.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Berry.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I think everybody has discussed this
and probably ad nauseam at this point, but my vote is going to
reflect today an area that we haven't covered. It hasn't been
dealt with
discussed and it's not included, and it hasn't been
separately.
And that has to do with the outlying areas that
Goodland, it includes Chokoloskee, and even though
it includes
Immokalee
has an overlay district, there's not been any discussion about this.
And, for example, if Chokoloskee would like to come back with
an idea because of their type of environment that they have down
there, perhaps they want to make a sign that has rope around it or
they want to do something with fishing or whatever it might be. I
don't know.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Architectural theme.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: This ordinance does not address this.
My vote today is going to represent this, because when you do
this ordinance today, you include all of Collier County.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: What precludes them from
developing --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: That's not entirely accurate.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- their own community character?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, it is. It is.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I don't believe that to be the case.
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Immokalee has an overlay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Immokalee has --
Page 116
January25,20000
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Immokalee does have an overlay but
Chokoloskee does not.
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Chokoloskee -- no, but Goodland is
coming with an overlay. The only place left is Chokoloskee.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I wish we were doing an
overlay for them.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, we're going to do that, Pam, but
we haven't done it yet, and that's why any time that any one of
you sat up here, you have never wrote in or said anything about an
exclusion. And you haven't done it, and any time this has come
back, there has been no exclusion. And, so, if that's the way it is
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Help us around that.
-- then I'm not going to -- then it's not
COMMISSIONER BERRY:
going to be 100 percent.
MR. MULHERE: With
Immokalee, the direction
communities came from an
communities --
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Right.
respect to Goodland as well as
to prepare an overlay for those
initiative by the residents of those
MR. MULHERE: -- coming to the board and asking the board to
authorize the staff to allocate resources to conduct those
activities. And we're in the process of coming -- of doing the
Goodland overlay right now, which we suspect will be six to nine
months.
We have no objection to doing an overlay for Chokoloskee. I'd
like to get some input from the citizens.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: That's the -- the overlay is not the
issue, Bob. When they have that, they're going to get special --
MR. MULHERE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: -- dispensation for things that they
want to do in that district.
MR. MULHERE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Okay? But right now this ordinance
doesn't say anything and doesn't speak to that, at least anywhere
I can find it. Now, if it does, show me where it is in here.
MR. MULHERE: This ordinance would apply -- let me make sure
Page t17
January25,20000
I understand what you're saying.
to Goodland and to Chokoloskee right now.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: That's my point.
MR. MULHERE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: That is exactly my point.
MR. MULHERE: Because they're both urban areas.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's the bad
Chokoloskee.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Absolutely.
This ordinance would apply both
news for
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I -- I don't think it's bad news. I
think there may be some things they want to do and some
architectural themes they want to do there, but trying to make all
parts of the community have some sort of attractive ordinance, I
don't think that's bad.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: But I'm not going to --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And I understand what you mean.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I'm not going to impose these
standards, Tim, on them because some of the things they might
want to do are not going to meet this. If you can't do -- there's
nothing in here that says you can put rope around a sign.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Nothing in here says you can't.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, there's nothing in here that says
you can.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Well, I think the law assumes you
can unless it's prohibited.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, again, as I said, I said it early on
that you didn't make any provision for making an exception. And
today's the final reading, so I'm going to have to vote against it.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: If we have no other public
speakers, we'll close the public hearing, Mr. Cautero, unless you
need to --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Let me ask a quick question. It
might allay Commissioner Berry's concerns.
Would we not have a -- a variance procedure, administratively
made perhaps for areas like Chokoloskee and Goodland?
MR. BADAMTCHIAN: We have administrative procedures for
variance -- for minor variances; however, major variances, they
Page 118
January25,20000
have to come in front of this board.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Until they get their overlays in place
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Then it would seem to me some of
the things I've heard might be ones that through administrative
variance it could be accommodated and I think we just ought to
in front
move forward and we'll deal with those when they come
of us, if and when that happens.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Do we have a motion?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: I move we accept
staff's
recommendations and proposals on the new sign -- on the new
ordinances.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion from Commissioner Carter.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could we --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS:
motion?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
second?
Which supplanted my original
Do you want to make that a
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I'll second, yeah.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Second from Commissioner Norris.
Further discussion?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just a question for Commissioner
Berry because I know that it's a very -- it's a valid concern.
How might we communicate with them or how might they
communicate with us if -- if they have a need -- I mean, maybe we
can give them a fast track variance procedure if there's -- I don't
want to -- there's a burgeoning of beginning environmental
ecotourism kind of stuff happening down there and the last thing
we need to do is to slow that down. They need to be able to
advertise and signage is important out there.
Is there something we can do, commissioner, that you can
think of that --
COMMISSIONER BERRY: We're trying to get together and get
the community organized in terms of looking at an overlay district
and doing some things like that. Let us do that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: You're already all over there. I
Page 1t9
January25,20000
mean, that's work in motion with you right now.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, we -- there's been some initial
discussion about that, and -- and I -- because they want to know
and there was some concern raised over this, and so what do we
do? And they want to take a look and we want to work with them,
but we have not done that yet because I really wanted it to come
from them. I'm not the --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I understand.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: -- the white knight riding in on the
horse saying I'm going to save you down here. I want the
initiative --because I did speak with some folks even as late as
this past week when I was in Everglades City about this kind of
thing, and what they need to do and how they need to proceed.
And when they get to that point, then we certainly have staff
and myself ready to come and sit down with them and work with
them, you know, and proceed. But right now we're not there yet.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do you have an idea, Vince?
MR. CAUTERO: Yes. If I may with your indulgence -- Vince
Cautero.
We did the same type of thing with residents from Goodland, as
Bob said, in working with them on an overlay district. That
certainly is something we would welcome and we can do that.
Another suggestion, if I may, I would like to propose that we
give this program that you're about to approve today a little bit of
time and we can monitor it not only in communities like
Chokoloskee but in Immokalee, Goodland and some other pockets
even in the urbanized area. And then we can come back to you.
These communities, as you know better than anyone, are very
different. And I'm constantly lobbied by officials and I constantly
have discussions with Fred Thomas about Immokalee. Just this
one example. He on occasion has been very plain with me and --
like he always is and says we should have different standards
here.
COMMISSIONER BERRY:
MR. CAUTERO: And
commissioner.
I would like to do that rather than
Passion is the word, Vince.
there -- passion is a good word,
go out and start talking
Page 120
January25,20000
about overlay districts in all these communities from scratch.
Give us a little bit of time to monitor it.
Of course, if you're working with representatives from that
community, we would do that with you. We'd be happy to assist.
But we hear these representatives from the communities. We
want you to know that. We hear them when they say they think
we should have different regulations; sometimes less stringent,
sometimes more stringent.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, there's -- this is only one part of
-- of a myriad of things that needs to be looked at. We're not going
to -- that's not the issue today.
But my problem, guys, is when we start doing -- when we do an
ordinance like this, you are doing it countywide, okay, with the
exception of the cities; you know, Marco Island, Everglades City
and the City of Naples. Those are exceptions.
So, when you do this, it is countywide. And -- and I tell you, I
don't want them to look like Naples and I don't want them to look
like Pelican Bay, and I don't want them to look like Naples Park or
East Naples or anywhere else.
They are unique unto themselves. A sign that works up here
doesn't work down there.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We'll call the question.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I've got a question for staff, a quick
question.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Does it relate directly to what
we're voting on?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes, it does. Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Mr. Cautero, if you get in the
meantime -- if we pass this and as you're monitoring it, can you
advise us if you get applications for signs if you have to deny in
any of these areas so we can stay advised?
MR. CAUTERO: Yes, commissioner. We can do that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, if we know that maybe there's
nothing hot happening while -- you know, while we go ahead and
pass the ordinance.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, you can pass it. You've got your
Page 121
January25,20000
four votes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Well, we're going to find out right
now.
All those in favor of the motion, please state aye.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Aye.
All those opposed?
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion carries four-one.
We move on to the board of zoning fields, 13(A) --
MR. NINO: Mr. Chairman, was that a motion to adopt the LDC
amendments?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Yes. That covered the whole ball
of wax.
MR. NINO: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Everything.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, that's too bad because I do
support the other amendments, but I did not support this
particular one. If that's the way you --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: The record will reflect.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Okay, because I do support the rest
of them.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to
publicly thank all the people that worked so hard on the LDC
amendments for signage. They've spent a lot of time --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Don -- hang on just a second,
Commissioner Carter.
Don, can you take that outside?
Sorry.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And as well as all the other people
who participated with us in the process. It was a big community
effort and I think we're going to be okay with it.
Page 122
January25,20000
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Hi there.
MR. REISCHL: Hi. Fred Reischl, Planning Services.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: 13(A)(3).
MR. REISCHL: And there's people we need to swear in.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Anybody who wants to participate
in this item -- what?
MR. McNEES: 13(A}(4}, commissioner.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Did we continue three?
MR. McNEES: Three we continued this morning.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yeah, that was continued.
Item #13A4
PETITION V-99-25, JOSEPH SABATINO REQUESTING A VARIANCE
OF 7.5 FEETFROM THE REQUIRED 7.5 FEET TO 0 FEET ALONG
THE WEST SIDE YARD OF LOTS 13 & 14 AND ALONG THE EAST
SIDE YARD OF LOTS 36 AND 37, AND ASSOCIATED VARIANCES
FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ALONG THE REAR LOT LINES
AND WITHIN THE COURTYARD WALLS FOR PROPERTIES
DESCRIBED AS LOTS 13, 14, 15, 36, 37 AND 38, BLOCK 17,
NAPLES PARK, UNIT 2 - WITHDRAWN BY THE PETITIONER
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Well, you'll get no argument out
of me. 13(A)(4), Petition V-99-25.
Anybody who's going to participate in this, please stand and
raise your right hand to be sworn. (Speakers sworn.)
MR. REISCHL: And this is a request for variances --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Who are you?
MR. REISCHL: Sorry?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: You may have said that before but
who are you?
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl, Planning Services.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
MR. REISCHL: This is a request to allow variances for a
proposed zero-lot line residences for courtyard-style homes in the
Naples Park location.
Page 123
January25,20000
As you can see on the visualizer, give you some reference, this
is Vanderbilt Drive, 111th Avenue. Some reference points are St.
John the Evangelist, Naples Park Elementary, and it involves six
lots that form a corridor between 111th and 110th Street.
The petitioner is proposing six single-family dwellings so
there's no change to density. Still remaining is six lots and he's
proposing six single-family homes. However, the homes do have a
-- a different character from the rest of Naples Park.
Ask you to see on the conceptual plan, he's proposing moving
the buildings to one side, so instead of having a
seven-and-a-half-foot setback on each side, you'll have a 15-foot
setback on one side, zero lot line on the other.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What does that do, Fred, to the
people who abut a property line? How close is that --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Could I just ask that we go
through the thing in its entirety, and then just if you have
questions, jot them down --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You may.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: -- and ask the questions as he
completes his time. I think it will be more efficient.
MR. REISCHL: Well, that was actually my next statement
anyway.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Great minds.
MR. REISCHL: Yeah.
The planning commission decided to not have this proposed
nine-foot setback between -- and the adjacent house here and the
adjacent house here. And they proposed, and Mr. Sabatino agreed
to have the total 15-foot separation between all the structures.
So, these two houses will of necessity be of a different design,
a little more either squeezed or smaller footprint.
The plan that you have in your packet is the correct one. It's
written in seven-and-a-half-foot setback. So, there will be a
maintained 15-foot separation between structures.
The other variance is the wall height and, again, this was
discussed a lot at the planning commission. The petitioner is
requesting a seven-foot-wall height.
Commissioner Wrage made the statement at the planning
Page124
January25,20000
commission that seven feet is typical in developments. It
prevents those of us taller than six feet from peering over into
your neighbor's yard. He said it's a common wall height in more
PUD type zoning rather than this type zoning, but that's what it
was being compared to. The permitted is at six feet and the
requested is seven.
Prior to the planning commission hearing, I received a lot of
phone calls. Most were in favor, four were opposed, and at the
planning commission four speakers spoke in opposition. It was
unusual, but I think every person who spoke at the planning
commission said it was a very nice looking project but it was out
of character with the rest of Naples Park.
Staff recommend -- recommended to the planning commission
that this be approved. This house, whatever character it is, could
be built in Naples Park with seven-and-a-half-foot side yard
setbacks and six-foot walls.
On that basis we recommended approval and the planning
commission recommends approval to you by a six-two vote.
The objection of the two planning commissioners in opposition
was the height of the wall.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Questions for our staff.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: I have a question.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Berry.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Right across the street on the north
side of 111th, is there not a walled community right out on 111th
that backs up to Naples Park Elementary and also St. John The
Evangelist.
MR. REISCHL: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: What's the height of the wall?
MR. REISCHL: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, this is directly across the street
-- am I -- by what you showed here.
MR. REISCHL: That's correct; however, their wall is around the
community. This wall -- let me show you though.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Okay. Show me the difference.
MR. REISCHL: These are going to be courtyard walls around
the backyard.
Page 125
Janua~ 25,20000
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That is just so pretty.
MR. REISCHL: And, again, a lot of people who called initially
said they didn't want a walled community in the middle of Naples
Park, and basically they're doing -- the petitioner is proposing
what any of these neighbors could do is have a wall extending
from the front of their house to the side yard and then around their
backyard.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, it's not going to -- it's not going
to include the whole yard. It's not going to --
MR. REISCHL: Correct. The neighbors across the street will
see three driveways, three front doors, three garages.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: Right.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Other questions?
COMMISSIONER CARTER: What -- did we finally say it was
going to be at six foot or a seven-foot wall?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right now, seven.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: They're asking for seven.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: They're asking for seven.
MR. REISCHL: They're asking for seven.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Is the recommendation that's
coming forward to make it a six?
MR. REISCHL: No. The planning commission cited that seven
Rea
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Was okay.
MR. REISCHL: -- was okay with them.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Do we have anyone here from the
petitioner?
MR. McNEES: No. You have one registered speaker.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Well, let's hear from someone --
MR. McNEES: Not registered. Excuse me. Nonregistered.
MR. REISCHL: The petitioner.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Let's hear from the petitioner.
Anything additional you want to share with us?
MR. SABATINO: Yes. My name is Joseph Sabatino and I just
want to clarify one point that Fred spoke of, and I think he alluded
to the fact that all of the units would be a 15-foot separation
Page126
January25,20000
between every new or old, but in the case of -- in the case of
moving Lot Number 15 and Lot Number 38, shifting that towards
the newer house, obviously we can't get 15 feet.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But you can shrink the house.
MR. SABATINO: They're already quite narrow at 35 feet,
35-foot wide homes. So, what --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: What's the square footage of the
house, each home?
MR. SABATINO: The smaller ones on 111th are around 2,000
square feet. They're two-story homes. And the larger ones are
about 23 to 2600 square feet.
One thought would be to flip -- would be to flip those two and
maintain a minimal of space in between the two new construction
homes. They have walls that are proposed to be glass block
openings, so there's no fret about that, and then maintain as large
as possible side yard on the other side. That's one alternative.
The other alternative is simply to put in the plan as it is. That's
the one I'm pushing for because I've talked to the two adjoining
property owners who have -- who are directly affected by this
development. That's the existing house here.
I've not talked to the -- the owner of that house, but in both
cases, both of those property owners are nonresidents -- I mean,
they're not -- they don't live in that house. They just -- they're
investment properties. They rent. They have renters.
And Mr. Throwmack (phonetic), who I did speak to, we -- we
got into discussions about perhaps having his house look like the
ones we're proposing to do some facelift. He had no objection to
the development. And I don't think either property owner has
indicated, through official objections or letters written or even
appearances here, that they object to it.
So, my proposal is to go with what we have. It's a -- it affects
the integrity of the concept by moving houses around.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How close would you be to the
house on the two affected lots to the neighboring houses?
MR. SABATINO: We're maintaining two feet from the property
line before we would start.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And what's -- and their side you're --
Page 127
January25,20000
MR. SABATINO: Start the wall and they have a
seven-and-a-half-foot side yard, so it would be nine and a half feet
versus another four and a half feet, which would comply with the
15-foot side yard.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You would basically get ten feet in
between instead of 15 --
MR. SABATINO: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- ballpark.
MR. SABATINO: And it would really -- and the two houses, if we
have to modify them back to seven and a half feet equidistant, it
surely kills the whole concept of the courtyard. The whole idea
here is to have a walled in space, one single courtyard that's
useable, 15 -- or one single side yard that's useable, 15-foot wide.
When you get into two seven-and-a-half-foot side yards, they're
simply alleys.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think -- I mean, I really like this
redevelopment project, which is the way I see it, but -- MR. SABATINO: It is.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- if you're going to have -- you
know, you're affording your new residents 15 feet between their
buildings, but the guy who's already there, the two renters, the
two tenants are already there, you're only going to give them nine
and a half, it seems sort of like you're gaining a benefit at their
expense.
MR. SABATINO: Essentially though, a wall -- it is the idea of
this development to have a wall surrounding the property line.
And in either case, whether there's 15 feet or not, there would be
a wall at that location.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I thought Fred just said there
wasn't going to be a wall on the property line.
MR. SABATINO: Well, what I'm saying is that whether it's two
feet from the property line or seven and a half feet, there would be
a wall.
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl.
The wall would not be in the front property line. There will be
walls on the side and rear.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You did say that.
Page 128
Janua~ 25,20000
MR. REISCHL: And a six-foot wall can go up to the property
line or two feet away; however, it's limited to six feet. The
variance is to increase that to seven.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Let's hear from our public speaker,
who I'm willing to bet is Vera Fitz-Gerald.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: You wouldn't be wrong either.
I'm Vera Fitz-Gerald and I'm the president of the Properties
Owners of Naples Park. And I don't know where the NPAA people
-- they said they were coming down. We had discussed this and
agreed on how we felt about it.
Now, I have to ask you. If you had a home, you had lived, let
me say, in one of the northern states all your life, and you finally
were able to retire and you build your home and somebody comes
along and builds a seven-foot wall right along your home. I
wonder how you'd feel about it. I think you'd probably be cross.
Naples Park is essentially a single-family community. We're
not a walled community. That's why we live there. We hate walls.
There are very few walls in Naples Park.
I polled the property owners of Naples Park. There were about
30 members, and a lot of them liked it. Mr. Sabatino said, "Do you
like this?"
And, of course, why would -- what's there not to like about it?
Then~ he said, it was sort of a, well, if you don't give me what I
want, this is what I'm going to build instead. And I found that
extremely offensive.
Back to the walls. I asked people, do you like this project?
Yes, they liked it. What about the seven-foot wall? Surprisingly,
there were at least ten or a third of the people that said they had
no objections to the seven-foot wall.
I'll tell you why in a minute. Then I asked them, how do you
feel about the zero lot line? None of them liked the zero lot line.
Now, the reason they liked the seven-foot wall was because
there were a number of people that lived beside duplexes and
they said, if he gets it, we can have it. We'll come down here for
that variance also. Now, do you want to start doing this?
As Sally Barker said, if you're going to okay this project, just
rewrite the LDC, because this really is setting a precedent and I
Page 129
Janua~ 25,20000
don't think it's a good one.
I've suggested to the petitioner that he simply flip 38 and 15
and he can maintain the seven-and-a-half-foot setback. He can
reduce the wall by one foot. It isn't going to hurt anything. No
one else has seven feet and I don't think this project needs it.
I know there are some here who would think the word, the
ambience of Naples Park is an oxymoron.
I have lived there for 23 years. It is not an oxymoron. We live
there for a good reason.
Now, let me just go -- this gentleman's an architect. I don't
understand why, if he knows he has 50 feet, he can't design
something within 50 feet.
There are 3,000 homes at least in Naples Park, some of them
really, really nice, especially the newer ones that are coming on.
They've maintained the seven-and-a-half-foot setback. I don't
know why this one petitioner feels he has to do something special
that's outside of the current LDC.
As I said, this -- it's a nice looking project. It just isn't -- goes
along with Naples Park. And I know that -- I know that this is just
the start of things because Naples Park is walking distance to the
beach, and I know that like Olde Naples, unfortunately, they're
going to come after for redevelopment, redevelopment,
redevelopment.
One of the things that the petitioner has said was that this is
going to really enhance Naples Park. It's going to increase the
value. But, you know, that's good news and bad news. It's good
news if you're looking forward to selling your home in the near
future and you want to maximize your profit.
I would say, hey, that's good news, but if you bought that as a
retirement home and you wanted to live there the rest of your life,
that is not good news, especially if you're on a fixed income. Like
people in Olde Naples you'll have to leave because you won't be
able to afford the taxes that is going to happen. So, this is the
double-edged sword.
So, again, as I say, I think that this gentleman can build this. I
think he can build it within the current requirements,
seven-and-a-half-foot setback and the six-foot wall.
Page130
January25,20000
And if you let them have zero lot line, don't forget, I'm down
here in two weeks with my request for a variance because I want
to put my lanai on it and right now I can't.
Okay. So, that was the objection of the property owners of
Naples Park and it was -- I hope I'm reflecting their thoughts. And
it also, by the way, was the comments that I got from those from
NPAA that I talked to but who didn't show. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you very much.
MR. SABATINO: May I respond to --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Briefly.
MR. SABATINO: -- some of those comments?
I have a handout.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: You can't talk while you're here
because she can't hear you on the microphone.
You can just give them all to me and I'll hand them out.
Kat Stevens.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Kat Stevens. He lives here?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. I know her. She's a she.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Johnny vanZam (phonetic). What,
you've got the musical community living up there?
MR. SABATINO: Mrs. Fitz-Gerald indicated that her people
weren't here and the reason her people are not here is they are all
in that petition, which meant that -- which means that I was
invited to their meeting. I presented this scheme to them with the
requested variances. They all unanimously supported the scheme
through the -- the --
MS. FITZ-GERALD: Not true.
MR. SABATINO: -- through the handwritten signatures that are
on that sheet.
Part of that presentation, it is true, was a scheme -- another
scheme, Scheme B, which is a permitted use with no variances of
a multifamily building in that district, RMF6, duplexes, singles,
multifamily are all permitted. I was merely indicating to that
group is that I intended to --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Excuse me. It would be indicated
by these very picturesque drawings you provided here?
Page 131
January25,20000
MR. SABATINO: That's the multi --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I can't imagine why they would
pick Scheme A over these drawings.
MR. SABATINO: Well, it is permitted.
I only wanted to bring that to their attention that we're trying
to put something of beauty there, and I intend to live on Lot 14.
I was looking for a residence in Naples Park. I passed by that
site. It was not for sale. I passed by that site. It was not for sale.
And I said there's an opportunity on cliffs of one acre of Naples
Park property that is probably the largest most contiguous piece
that there is. There was an opportunity to do something rather
nice.
And I was designing for myself in mind because I was going to
live on lot -- I am going to live on Lot 14 if I could get these
variances, which is essentially a courtyard dwelling of high
quality.
I went --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Now, can you --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I need to ask a question, and rather
than have another sales pitch -- MR. SABATINO: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- I need to ask a question here.
The -- the setbacks on the side that -- that are the long side,
how many feet is that?
MR. SABATINO: I'm not sure what you mean by the long side.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, you've got zero sides and then
you've got the long side.
MR. SABATINO: Are you talking about -- the setback is 15 foot
-- 15 foot between buildings.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Okay. So -- all right. Now, the one
above your finger, that one, how much is that?
MR. SABATINO: 15 foot to the property line and then there's an
additional seven and a half feet to the other residents, so it would
be 20 -- 23 feet.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Why don't you just shift all of them
seven and a half feet to that side and you -- you won't have to
have a variance.
Page 132
Januaw 25,20000
MR. SABATINO-' Well, the whole idea with the -- is to throw all
of the side yard into one side of the new residences, all of the side
yard into one side, which means that you have one single useable
side yard that's part of the courtyard.
In fact, there's a rendering --
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Okay. Well, let me -- let me tell you
my-- my objection here.
If we have a PUD and internally in the PUD they want to come
in with -- with shortened setbacks or zero lot line setbacks, that
really doesn't affect anybody but the people within that PUD, and
it's not objectionable to anybody else.
But here, what you're asking for is to go zero lot line on -- right
next door to somebody else's property that's not in a PUD and --
MR. SABATINO: It's actually two feet.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Two feet. Well, still, it's a variance
of five and a half feet from the --
MR. SABATINO: On two of the properties where the people do
not object.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Well, it doesn't matter.
MR. SABATINO: Okay. I understand.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: They might sell that to somebody
who does object in the future and, therefore, reduce the value of
the property. But the reason the setbacks are in there is to
protect people's property from someone else. And it's not the
same as being inside a PUD. So, I'm going to have a real difficult
time supporting that.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I'll tell you, earlier I was
considering, but the sure way to make me vote against something
is to be disingenuous with me. And this thing you handed out, the
summary says Gulf Walk Communities will construct one of the
two schemes before you, A or B. And then you talk -- make
reference of a ballot.
So, clearly, the question was not do you think A should -- do
you think we should build A? Is there anything you should
change? The question was, what do you like better, A or B?
I don't blame them for liking A better, but to bring that and say
nobody has any objections I don't think is completely
Page 133
January25,20000
straightforward with us.
So, I just -- and I'm not going to -- we're not going to go back
and forth and debate that issue.
But we're going to close the public hearing unless there's other
questions for the petitioner.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have just one, and I'm trying to
understand both Vera and John have now said that there's a way
to do this with some shift -- with flipping the building?
I can't see how it's possible to do this and keep the 15-foot
lots, but if there is such a possibility, speak up, because I think
you're about to lose the project and the project looks really, really
nice to me. I'd like to support it, but not if there's a way that you
can do it without impinging on the existing neighbors.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Well, he doesn't need our approval
if he doesn't have the variance on the setbacks or on the wall, so I
mean that's --
MR. SABATINO: They're single-family homes.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: -- the only question that's
us.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But he needs
need a six-foot wall without the variance.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And he can
regardless of what we do today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that -- is that true?
I misunderstood that the wall was --
MR. REISCHL: Yes. That's true.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And if I
objection from Vera was the -- that
before
the wall. He might
have a six-foot wall
Okay. Sorry.
were to understand the
rear structure, if that --
otherwise, if those changes could be made, go to a six-foot wall,
and if you could take care of the situation on the rear structure,
was I understanding, Vera,
project?
MS. FITZ-GERALD: I'm--
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE:
on the record.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS:
We closed the public hearing.
that you were not opposing the
You can't talk from there. It's not
You can't talk from up here either.
Page 134
Januaw 25,20000
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We'll reopen it in deference to
Commissioner Carter's question.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Okay.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: Okay. All right. We objected to the zero lot
line. We really did, and you were right on the money when you
said that that was what we were asked on polling.
Do you -- I have another question for
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
her, too.
It seems to me that you
themselves --
MS. FITZ-GERALD: No.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
wouldn't mind if they zero lot lined
-- if on the interior lot.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: If they want a zero lot line themselves, zero
lot line yourselves, but do not zero lot line to the abutting property
owner.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: Okay, That's fine, Thank you,
MR, SABATINO: It was merely an attempt to have a
courtyard-style dwelling,
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I appreciate that. We're not going
to have another sales pitch here.
MR. SABATINO: And --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: You're done. Unless there's a
question for you, you're done.
The public hearing is closed. What's the pleasure of the board?
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Motion to deny.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: There's a motion to deny the
variances or the request as it comes in the variances.
I'll second that.
Discussion?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I wonder if there is any interest on
behalf of the motion maker to allow the variances as to the
internal lots but not as to the boundary, so that it only affects the
new property owners and not the existing property owners?
I mean, I would be willing to let them make these interior lots
15 -- interior setbacks 15 feet as to those four that they can do on
an interior basis to give them some leeway to have a variation in
design of a courtyard project there --
Page 135
January25,20000
MR. SABATINO: You could have two duplexes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: What I object to is, like you said,
the guy on the outside who shouldn't have this now impinged upon
him, if that's good grammar.
COMMISSIONER BERRY: How far are those -- what's the side
setback on, let's say, the one that borders up on a hundred and --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Seven and a half, and he's
proposing zero, but the net would be -- instead of the guy up here
in the top left corner, instead of him having 15 feet, he would have
about ten feet, ballpark. And I'm saying that may be not fair to
these --
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: I don't care if they want that zero lot
line inside. As a matter of fact, all they have to do is reverse the
floor plan and put the walls together and they can all have 15-foot
courtyards and not infringe on the guy's --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- neighboring property.
MR. SABATINO: You could do two duplexes.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: You're done, pal. You know, the
chairman has asked you not --
MR. SABATINO: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: -- to speak anymore. Why don't you
sit down?
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: If there's a question, that's fine,
otherwise the public hearing is closed.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Okay. If you reverse that and put
the walls together, then everybody could have 15-foot yard -- side
yards and they wouldn't be infringing on somebody else's
property.
I'm just trying to protect the other people's properties is all I'm
trying to do.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And I'm thinking in Pelican Marsh
there is -- I can't remember the name of the project but they do
have -- they share a common wall.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
COMMISSIONER CARTER: And these are very expensive, I
Page 136
Janua~ 25,20000
guess you would call, courtyard homes, and there's a common
wall that's shared and I don't know if the petitioner would prefer
to withdraw this and go back and think about that and come back
in with a different design which doesn't require any variances,
then he doesn't even have to come to us again.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: A couple of options before you, Mr.
Sabatino. You can withdraw this so that we don't turn it down
and you can accept the suggestion that any variances will be
internal only or it appears it may get shot down.
It will likely get shot down if you don't make any changes, so
those are kind of your three choices. Why don't you go down,
have those only apply internally or just withdraw it and see what
you need to do for -- for the next couple of weeks.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: I'd like to withdraw it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If he withdraws it -- I'm sorry, but I
just want to make it clear -- David, can he reapply or does he have
a six-month delay before he can reapply?
MR. WEIGEL: No. If he withdraws it and the board is not
taking action, he can reapply.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Okay. But by withdrawing it, you
allow yourself to come back if you come up with a different plan
two weeks from now or a month from now. If we turned it down,
you'd have six months that it would sit out there so -- MR. SABATINO: Very good.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you.
Item #14
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Staff Communications. Mr. Weigel, you indicated you might
have something?
MR. WEIGEL: I did and the news is good and that is that Mary
Morgan has worked assiduously and prevailed in -- with the
software so that the ballot question can remain unchanged on the
March straw ballot for the tourist development tax.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you for the good news.
Page 137
Januaw 25,20000
Mr. Mcnees.
MR. McNEES: My news is even better. I have nothing.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Fantastic.
Commissioner Berry.
COMMISSIONER BERRY= Nor do I.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE= Commissioner Norris.
COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Nothing new.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Carter.
COMMISSIONER CARTER= Nor do I.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE= Nada.
CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Miss Filson, may we be excused?
MS. FILSON= Absolutely.
Commissioner Mac'Kie moved, seconded by Commissioner
Carter, and carried unanimously, that the following items
be approved and or/adopted: *****
Item #16A1
ONE-TIME EXEMPTION FROM THE VEHICLE USE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND CHECKER CAB, INC., THE
PRIMARY SUBCONTRACTOR TO INTELITRAN, INC., FOR REPAIRS
TO THE COUNTY'S TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED BUS
FLEET
Item #16A2
CLEARING AND FILLING OF 46 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON
APPROXIMATELY 10 ACRES IN THE CARSON LAKES
SUBDIVISION PHASE I DEVELOPMENT - AND WAIVER OF THE
VEGETATION REMOVAL FEE AND REVEGETATION BOND
Item #16A3
Page 138
Januaw 25,20000
SELF-CERTIFICATION THAT COLLIER COUNTY MEETS THE
STATE MANDATED REQUIREMENTS TO BE DESIGNATED AS A
QUICK PERMITTING COUNTY
Item #16A4
CARNIVAL PERMIT 2000-01, DUANE WHEELER, CARNIVAL
CHAIRMAN, ROTARY OF IMMOKALEE, PERMIT TO CONDUCT A
CARNIVAL FROM FEBRUARY 10, 11, 12, 13, 2000, ON COUNTY
OWNED PROPERTY LO9CATED AT THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL
AIRPORT - AND WAIVE FEES FOR CARNIVAL PERMIT,
OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE AND SURETY BOND
Item #16A5
FINAL PLAT OF CARDINAL COVE AT FIDDLER'S CREEK - WITH
PERFORMANCE BOND, CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND STIPULATIONS
Item #16A6
FINAL PLAT OF "TERRANOVA OF PELICAN MARSH UNIT ONE -
WITH PERFORMANCE SECURITY, CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND STIPULATIONS
Item #16A7
FINAL PLAT OF "TERRANOVA OF PELICAN MARSH UNIT TWO -
WITH PERFORMANCE SECURITY, CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND STIPULATIONS
Item #16A8
FINAL PLAT OF "TERRANOVA OF PELICAN MARSH UNIT THREE -
WITH PERFORMANCE SECURITY, CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND STIPULATIONS
Page 139
Janua~ 25,20000
Item #16A9
COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION PERMIT NO. 59.693 (MOD.) REDBIRD
ESTATES, BOUNDED ON THE NORTH, THE EAST AND THE WEST
BY AGRICULTURAL ZONING AND ON THE SOUTH BY REDBIRD
LANE R/W AND AGRICULTURAL ZONING - WITH STIPULATIONS
Item #16A10
FINAL PLAT OF "ANA'S PLACE"
Item #16A11
FINAL PLAT OF "CLUB ESTATES REPLAT'
Item #16B1
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WORK ORDER #TE-98-
WM-07, FOR ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
AT VANDERBILT DRIVE (CR 901) AND WIGGINS PASS ROAD (CR
888) - IN THE AMOUNT OF $47,838
Item #16B2
RESOLUTION 2000-18, RESTRICTING DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS
ON COLLECTOR AND ARTERIAL ROADWAYS IN THE GOLDEN
GATE ESTATES AREA
Item #16B3
RESOLUTION 2000-19, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A LOCAL
AGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16B4
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION SERVICES BY
Page140
Janua~ 25,20000
HOLE, MONTES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR LIVINGSTON ROAD
IMPROVEMENTS NORTH OF IMMOKALEE ROAD - FOR THE TOTAL
NEGOTIATED FEE OF $422,268 - AND PREPARATION AND
EXECUTION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT TO EFFECTUATE
THE REQUIRED CONTRACT
Item #16B5 - Deleted
Item #16B6
UTILITY EASEMENT GRANTED TO COLLIER COUNTY WATER-
SEWER DISTRICT FROM OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB, INC., TO
COMPLETE THE NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT
PLANT 8-MGD EXPANSION
Item #16B7
RFP-99-2981, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
WILSON MILLER, INC., AGNOLI, BARBER AND BRUNDAGE, INC.,
COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC., SOUTHERN
MAPPING, INC. AND WILKISON AND ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR THE
FIXED TERM LAND SURVEYING AND PHOTOGRAMETRIC
SERVICES
Item #16B8
RFP-99-2996, CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS
SERVICES FOR IMMOKALEE ROAD (I-75 TO C.R. 951) FOUR LANE
IMPROVEMENTS TOP RANKED FIRMS: JOHNSON ENGINEERING,
INC.; WILSON MILLER, INC.; AND C.A.P. ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS, INC.; AND STAFF TO BEGIN CONTRACT
NEGOTIATIONS
Item #16B9
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH NAPLES HERITAGE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Page141
Januaw 25,20000
Item #16B10
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER $23,300 FROM THE
PELICAN BAY STREET LIGHTING FUND (778) RESERVES TO
CAPITAL OUTLAY
Item #16Cl
OLDER AMERICANS ACT CONTINUATION GRANT BETWEEN THE
AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., AND
COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16C2
MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING
FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., AND COLLIER COUNTY
RELATING TO SERVICES FOR SENIORS' GRANT PROGRAMS
Item #16C3
BID NO. 99-3024, FOR THE SOCIAL SERVICES PRESCRIPTION
PROGRAM - AWARDED TO WAL-MART STORES
Item #16C4
RENTAL AGREEMENT WITH SPRINT TELIMAGINE, INC., FOR
TELEPHONE SYSTEM RENTAL FOR THE HEADQUARTERS
LIBRARY - IN THE AMOUNT OF $687 MONTHLY
Item #16C5
STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE REORGANIZATION OF THE
CURRENT ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCES TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL FINES AND CORRECT DEFICIENCIES IN THE
CURRENT ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCES 93-56 AND 94-10
Page 142
Janua~ 25,20000
Item #16C6
LIMITED USE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH SAINT KATHERINE'S
GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH, INC., FOR USE OF COUNTY-OWNED
LAND AT THE DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES FACILITY FOR
PARKING FOR AN ANNUAL EVENT TO BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 4,
5, AND 6, 2000
Item #16D1
RESOLUTION 2000-20, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF
DEEDS AND AGREEMENTS FOR DEED TO RIGHT OF INTERMENT
FOR THE PURCHASE OF BURIAL LOTS AT LAKE TRAFFORD
MEMORIAL GARDENS CEMETERY FOR THE 2000 CALENDAR
YEAR
Item #16D2
RESOLUTION 2000-21, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE
REAL ESTATE SALES AGREEMENTS AND STATUTORY DEEDS
FOR THE G.A.C. LAND SALES TRUST CONVEYED TO COLLIER
COUNTY BY AVATAR PROPERTIES, INC. (AGREEMENT DATED
NOVEMBER 15, 1983)
Item #16D3
RESOLUTION 2000-22, PROVIDING FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF
ALL CONVEYANCES MADE TO COLLIER COUNTY AND THE
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, MADE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENT REQUIREMENTS AS AN INTEGRAL
PART OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS; RESOLUTION
2000-23, DECLARING THAT A FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN REAL
PROPERTY IS THE PREFERRED INTEREST SOUGHT FOR THE
ACQUISITION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR TRANSPORTATION
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS; AND RESOLUTION 2000-24,
RELATING TO THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTIES, DELEGATING
AUTHORITY TO THE CALENDAR YEAR 2000 CHAIRMAN OF THE
Page 143
Janua~ 25,20000
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO EXECUTE CERTAIN
DOCUMENTS INCIDENT TO PROPERTIES ACQUISITION ON
BEHALF OF THE BOARD, AUTHORIZING STAFF TO PROCEED
WITH CERTAIN ACTIVITIES REQUIRED TO EXPEDITE SAID
PROPERTY ACQUISITION, AND WAIVING CERTAIN PROCEDURAL
REQUIREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT OF THE COUNTY'S GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN
Item #16D4
RESOLUTION 2000-25, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF
LIMITED USE LICENSE AGREEMENTS BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE
BOARD FOR THE 2000 CALENDAR YEAR
FOR SPECIAL EVENTS ON COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY
Item #16D5
COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY DECLARED AS SURPLUS;
ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER RECEIVED FOR THE SALE OF AlS
HARDWARE UNDER BID NO. S99-3006 TO DATAMARC COMPUTER
SALES, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,000
Item #16D6
BID #99-2959, FOR TEMPORARY CLERICAL SERVICE AWARDED
TO OLSTEN STAFFING, KELLY SERVICES, TEMPORARY POWER
OF FLORIDA, MANPOWER AND OFFICE SPECIALISTS (OLSTEN
STAFFING AND KELLY SERVICES SHALL BE THE PRIMARY
VENDORS} - IN THE APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF $100,000
Item #16D7
AMENDMENTS TO LEASE AGREEMENTS AMENDING THE
METHOD FOR THE COLLECTION OF NOMINAL RENTS -AS
DESCRIBED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 144
January25,20000
Item #16E1
BUDGET AMENDMENT 00-087
Item #16G1
AGREEMENT BETWEEN WEST COAST MEDIA GROUP AND
COLLIER COUNTY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HURRICANE
HOME PROTECTION GUIDE
Item #16H1
SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR SERVICES OF THE PUBLIC
DEFENDER
Item #16H2
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR REFERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence as presented
by the Board of County Commissioners has been directed to the
various departments as indicated:
Page 145
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
January 25, 2000
FOR BOARD ACTION:
1.
Satisfaction of Lien: NEED MOTION authorizing the Chairman to sign Satisfaction
of Lien for Services of the Public Defender for Case Nos.: 92-279-MI, 92-7084-
MMA, 92-6356-MMA, 94-783-CFA, 97-3347-MMA, 98-6472-MMA, 98-
8231 -MMA
ge
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS
DIRECTED:
e
Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Chapter
! 36.06( 1 ), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for the
period:
A. December 15 - 28, 1999
B. December 29, 1999 - January 4, 2000
4. Districts:
Re
Collier Mosquito Control District - Annual Budget for 1999-2000; Annual
Audit Report - Year Ended September 3;0, 1999; Annual Financial Report
- Year Ended September 3;0, 19999; Regular Meeting Schedule 1999-
2000; District Map; and Registered Office-Registered Agent
Be
Fiddler's Creek Community Development District - Minutes of meeting held
October 27, 1999 and Financial Statements for September 3;0, 1999
Unaudited
Ce
Collier Soil and Water Conservation District - Agenda for December 8,
1999 meeting and minutes of November 3;, 1999
Se
Minutes:
Aw
City/County Beach Renourishment Advisory Committee - Agenda for
January 6, 2000 meeting
Be
Rural Lands Oversight Committee - Agenda for January
and minutes of December 6, 1999 meeting
I O~ 2~QO meedn~
AGENDA, I.TJE D)
No.
JAN 25 2000
pg.
Ce
De
Ee
Ge
He
Board of Building Adjustments and Appeals - Abbreviated minutes of
December 14, 1999 meeting
Historical/Archaeological Preservation Board - Minutes of December 10,
999 meeting
Environmental Advisory Council - Agenda for January 5, 2000 meeting
Rural Fringe Area Assessment Oversight Committee - Agenda for January
12, 2000 meedng and minutes of November 17, 1999 and December 15,
1999 meetings
Pelican Bay HSTBU Advisory Committee - Agenda for January 5, 2000
meeting and minutes of December 1, 1999 meeting
Immokalee Beautification HSTU Advisory Committee - Agenda for January
19, 2000 meeting and minutes of November i 7, 1999 meeting
JAN 25 2000
pg. ,~'
Januaw 25,20000
Item #1611
CARRYFORWARD FUNDING FOR PROPERTY APPRAISER'S
OFFICE IMAGING AND GIS SYSTEMS
Item #16J1
EXPERT FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACQUISITION OF
PARCELS 713A, 713B, 813A AND 813B IN THE LAWSUIT
ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. NAPLES ITALIAN AMERICAN
CLUB, INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 98-1672-CA-01 (AIRPORT ROAD
SIX LANING PROJECT FROM PINE RIDGE ROAD TO VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD); AND STAFF TO DEPOSIT THE SUM OF $65,300.25
INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE COURT
Item #16J2
MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT PERTAINING TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 105A AND 105B IN
COLLIER COUNTY V. MARIANNE BENDOTT, ET AL., CASE NO. 92-
2045-CA, AND STIPULATED FINAL JUDGEMENT TO BE DRAFTED
INCORPORATING THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THE
AFOREMENTIONED MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Item #16K1
IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CONSERVATION EASEMENT -
ADDITIONAL VERBIAGE TO PAGE 1, SECTION 1, OF SAID DEED
OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR THE FLORIDA FISH AND
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2000-26/DEVELOPMENT ORDER 2000-01, RE
PETITION DR1-99-02, KAREN BISHOP OF PMS INC. OF NAPLES,
REPRESENTING RONTO LIVINGSTON, INC., REQUESTING
APPROVAL OF THE "RONTO LIVINGSTON DRI/PUD', CONSISTING
Page146
Januaw 25,20000
'OF A MAXIMUM OF 1,380 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, AND A
GOLF COURSE AND RELATED FACILITIES FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED EAST OF THE FUTURE LIVINGSTON ROAD, WEST OF
INTERSTATE 75, AND IMMEDIATELY CONTIGUOUS AND SOUTH
OF THE COLLIER/LEE COUNTY BOUNDARY, CONSISTING OF
462.72+/- ACRES (COMPANION TO PUD-99-09}
Item #17B
ORDINANCE 2000-04, RE PETITION PUD-99-09, KAREN BISHOP
OF PMS, INC. OF NAPLES, REPRESENTING RONTO LIVINGSTON,
INC., REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "A" RURAL AGRICULTURE
WITH "ST" OVERLAYS TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
TO BE KNOWN AS RONTO LIVINGSTON PUD FOR MIXED
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF NOT MORE THAN 1,380
DWELLING UNITS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF THE
FUTURE LIVINGSTON ROAD, WEST OF INTERSTATE 75, AND
IMMEDIATELY CONTIGUOUS AND SOUTH OF THE COLLIER/LEE
COUNTY BOUNDARY, CONSISTING OF 462.72+/- ACRES
(COMPANION TO DR1-99-02}
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2000-05, RE PETITION PUD-99-04, ROBERT L.
DUANE, AICP, HOLE, MONTES AND ASSOCIATES,
REPRESENTING NORTH PORT DEVELOPMENT, INC.,
REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "CON" CONSERVATION AND
"RT", RESORT TOURIST TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS NORTH PORT BAY PUD, A
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NOT TO EXCEED 248 MULTI-
FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF U.S. 41 IN PORT-OF-THE-ISLANDS, CONSISTING
OF 49.96 ACRES
Item #17D
ORDINANCE 2000-06, RE PETITION R-99-8, MR. TERRANCE
Page 147
Janua~ 25,20000
KEPPLE OF KEPPLE ENGINEERING, REPRESENTING THE
COMMUNITY SCHOOL OF NAPLES, REQUESTING A REZONE
FROM "A" RURAL AGRICULTURE AND "A" WITH AN APPROVED
CONDITIONAL USE FOR A SCHOOL TO "CF" FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PINE RIDGE ROAD (CR-896)
AND ON THE WEST SIDE OF LIVINGSTON ROAD
Item #17E
RESOLUTION 2000-27, RE PETITION CU-99-25, AMIN FARAH OF
FIRST STOP, REPRESENTING RAIDA HAMDAN, REQUESTING
CONDITIONAL USE "13" OF THE C-4 ZONING DISTRICT FOR A
BUS STOP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF
BOSTON AVENUE AND FIRST STREET IN IMMOKALEE, LOTS 11
AND 12, BLOCK 1, CARSON SUBDIVISION, CONSISTING OF 1+/-
ACRES
Item #17F
RESOLUTION 2000-28, RE PETITION V-99-08, JAMES M.
MCGANN, REPRESENTING SOCIETY OF ST. VINCENT DE PAUL
THRIFT STORE, REQUESTING A 15 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE
REQUIRED 15 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK TO 0 FEET FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3196 DAVIS BOULEVARD, LOT 133,
NAPLES GROVE & TRUCK COMPANY'S LITTLE FARM #2
Page 148
January25,20000
There being no further business for the good of the County,
the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:25 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL ·
"/ i ~ ·
TIMOTHy/c~N$1',~NTINE, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:**,
DWjGHT,.E~' BROCK, CLERK
$~r~.~'l~l~l~in~Jtes approved by the Board on ~ ~ a~)
'as' Presen,t, ed / or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING
BY: Dawn M. Breehne and Rose M. Witt, RPR
Page 149